The perception of danger and competence as predictors of prejudice towards different social groups
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24310/espsiescpsi.v8i1.13224Keywords:
Prejudice, Right-wing authoritarianism, Social Dominance Orientation, Danger, CompetenceAbstract
Prejudice has been described as a generalized phenomenon because individuals who express prejudice towards certain social groups also tend to express prejudice toward other groups. However, recent studies indicate that the perception of danger expressed by right-wing authoritarians and the perception of intergroup competence expressed by indivi-duals with a social dominance orientation could be distinguishing factors in explaining the generalized prejudice. The main aim of this study was to analyse the dimensionality of generalized prejudice and then investigate if right-wing authoritarianism and a social dominance orientation were predictors of various forms of prejudice. The sample com-prised 376 college students from Buenos Aires aged between 18 and 42 years (M = 23.17, SD = 3.1), of whom 42.1% were male. The main results suggest that there are three dimensions that distinguish different social groups, which are differentially explained by a social dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism. These findings reinforce the notion of generalized prejudice as a complex and multidimensional phenomenon, differentially explained by the perception of danger and competence that manifests through individual levels of authoritarianism and social dominance.
Downloads
Metrics
References
Adorno, T., Frenkel-Brunswick, E., Levinson, D. y San-ford, R. (1950). The authoritarian personality. New York: Harper.
Akrami, N., Ekehammar, B. y Bergh, R. (2011). Generalized prejudice: Common and specific components. Psychological Science, 22, 57-59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797610390384
Allport, G. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Altemeyer, B. (1981). Right-Wing Authoritarianism. Winnipeg, Canada: University of Manitoba Press.
Altemeyer, B. (1988). Enemies of freedom: Understanding right-wing authoritarianism. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Altemeyer, B. (1996). The authoritarian spectre. Cam-bridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Altemeyer, B. (1998). The other “authoritarian personality.” In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 30, pp. 47-92). San Diego: Academic.
Altemeyer, B. (2006). The Authoritarians. Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press.
Asbrock, F., Christ, O., Duckitt, J. y Sibley, C. G. (2012). Differential effects of intergroup contact for authoritarians and social dominators: A Dual Process Model perspective. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 477-490. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146167211429747
Asbrock, F., Sibley, C. G. y Duckitt, J. (2010). Right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation and the dimensions of generalized prejudice: A longitudinal test. European Journal of Personality, 24, 324-340.
Bierly, M. M. (1985). Prejudice Toward Contemporary Outgroups as a Generalized Attitude. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 15, 189–199. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1985.tb02344.x
Brandt, M. J. y Reyna, C. (2011). Stereotypes as attributions. In E. L. Simon (Ed.) Psychology of Stereotypes (pp.47-80). New York:Nova Science Publishers.
Cohrs, J. C. y Asbrock, F. (2009). Right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation and prejudice against threatening and competitive ethnic groups. European Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 270–289. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.545
Cohrs, J. C., Asbrock, F. y Sibley, C. G. (2012). Friend or foe, champ or chump? Social conformity and superiority goals activate warmth- versus competence based social categorization schemas. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3, 471-478. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1948550611427357
Dovidio, J., Hewstone, M., Glick, P. y Esses, V. (2010). Prejudice, stereotyping and discrimination: Theoretical and empirical overview. En J. Dovidio, M. Hewstone, P. Glick, y V. Esses (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of prejudice stereotyping and discrimination. (pp. 3-29). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Duckitt, J. (2001). A dual-process cognitive-motivational theory of ideology and prejudice. In M. P. Zanna, (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, (Vol. 33, pp.41-113). New York: Academic Press.
Duckitt, J. (2006). Differential effects of right wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation on outgroup atti-tudes and their mediation by threat from and competitiveness to outgroups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 684-696. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146167205284282
Duckitt, J. y Sibley, C. (2007). Right Wing Authoritarianism, Social Dominance Orientation and the Dimensions of Generalized Prejudice. European Journal of Personality, 21, 113–130. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/per.614
Duckitt, J., Wagner, C., du Plessis, I. y Birum, I. (2002). The psychological bases of ideology and prejudice: Testing a dual process model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 75-93. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.1.75
Duriez, B. y Van Hiel, A. (2002). The March of Modern Fascism. A comparison of Social Dominance Orientation and Authoritarianism. Personality and Individual Differences, 32, 1199–1213. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(01)00086-1
Ekehammar, B. y Akrami, N. (2003). The relation between personality and prejudice: A variable- and a personcentred approach. European Journal of Personality, 17, 449-464. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/per.494
Ekehammar, B., Akrami, N., Gylje, M. y Zakrisson, I.(2004). What matters most to prejudice: Big five personlity, social dominance orientation, or right-wing authoritarianism? European Journal of Personality, 18, 463–482. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/per.526
Etchezahar, E. (2012). Las dimensiones del autoritarismo: Análisis de la escala de autoritarismo del ala de derechas (RWA) en una muestra de estudiantes universitarios de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires. Revista Psicología Política, 12,591-603.
Etchezahar, E. y Brussino, S. (2013). Psychological perspective on the study of authoritarianism. Journal of Alter-native Perspectives in the Social Sciencies, 5, 495-521.
Etchezahar, E., Prado-Gascó, V., Jaume, L. y Brussino, S.(2014). Validación argentina de la escala de Orientación a la Dominancia Social (SDO). Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología, 46, 35-43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0120-0534(14)70004-4
Feldman, S. (2003). Enforcing social conformity: A theory of authoritarianism. Political Psychology, 24, 41-74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/0162-895X.00316
Fiske, S. T., Xu, J., Cuddy, A. y Glick, P. (1999). (Dis) respecting versus (dis)liking: Status and interdependence predict ambivalent stereotypes of competence and warmth. Journal of Social Issues, 55, 473-491. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00128
Glick, P. y Fiske, S. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 12, 1323-1334.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E. y Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate Data Analysis. New Jersey: Pearson.
Hambleton, R. K. (1994). Guidelines for adapting educational and psychological tests: A progress report. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 10, 229-244.
Hambleton, R. K. (1996). Adapting tests for use in multiple languages and cultures. En J. Muñiz (Ed.), Psicometría (pp. 207-238). Madrid: Universitas.
Hambleton, R. K. (2005). Issues, Designs and Technical Guidelines for Adapting Tests Into Multiple Languages and Cultures. In R. K. Hambleton, P. F. Merenda and C.D.Spielberger (Eds.). Adapting Psychological and Educational Tests for Cross-Cultural Assessment (pp. 3-38). NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Henry, P. J. y Pratto, F. (2010). Power and racism. In A. Guinote y T. Vescio (Eds.), The social psychology of power (pp. 341-362). New York: Guilford.
Instituto Nacional contra la Discriminación, la Xenofobia y el Racismo (2013). Mapa Nacional de la Discriminación 2013: “Segunda serie de estadísticas sobre la discriminación en Argentina”. Buenos Aires: INADI.
Mavor, K., Louis, W. y Sibley, C. (2010). A bias-corrected exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of right-wing authoritarianism: Support for a three-factor structure. Personality and Individual Differences, 48, 28-33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.08.006
McFarland, S. (2010). Authoritarianism, social dominance, and other roots of generalized prejudice. Political Psychology, 31, 453–477. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2010.00765.x
Muñiz, J., Elosua, P. y Hambleton, R. K. (2013). Directrices para la traducción y adaptación de los tests: segunda edición. Psicothema 25, 151-157.
Observatorio de la Deuda Social Argentina (2012). Barómetro de la deuda Social Argentina, número 7. Asimetrías en el desarrollo humano y social, 2007/2010-2011: progre-sos económicos en un contexto de vulnerabilidad persistente. Buenos Aires: Educa.
Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L. y Malle, B. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 741–763. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.4.741
Sibley, C. G. y Duckitt, J. (2008). Personality and prejudice: A meta-analysis and theoretical review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12, 248-279. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1088868308319226
Sibley, C. G. y Duckitt, J. (2013). The dual process model of ideology and prejudice: A longitudinal test during a global recession. Journal of Social Psychology, 153, 448-466.http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2012.757544
Sidanius, J. y Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance. Cam-bridge, MASS: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139175043
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
All contents published in Escritos de Psicología are protected under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) license. All about this license is available in the following link: <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0>
Users can copy, use, redistribute, share and exhibit publicly as long as:
- The original source and authorship of the material are cited (Journal, Publisher and URL of the work).
- It is not used for comercial purposes.
- The existence of the license and its especifications are mentioned.
There are two sets of authors’ rights: moral and property rights. Moral rights are perpetual prerogatives, unrenounceable, not-transferable, unalienable, imprescriptible and inembargable. According to authors’ rights legislation, Escritos de Psicología recognizes and respects authors moral rights, as well as the ownership of property rights. The property rights are referred to the benefits that are gained by the use or the dissemination of works. Escritos de Psicología is published in an open access form and it is exclusively licenced by any means for doing or authorising distribution, dissemination, reproduction, , adaptation, translation or arrangement of works.
Authors are responsable for obtaining the necessary permission to use copyrighted images.
10.png)
ESCRITOS DE PSICOLOGÍA por 