Can gender inequality be created without inter-group discrimination?

Understanding human societies requires knowing how they develop gender hierarchies which are ubiquitous. We test whether a simple agent-based dynamic process could create gender inequality. Relying on evidence of gendered status concerns, self-construals, and cognitive habits, our model included a gender difference in how responsive male-like and female-like agents are to others' opinions about the level of esteem for someone. We simulate a population who interact in pairs of randomly selected agents to influence each other about their esteem judgments of self and others. Half the agents are more influenced by their relative status rank during the interaction than the others. Without prejudice, stereotypes, segregation, or categorization, our model produces inter-group inequality of self-esteem and status that is stable, consensual, and exhibits characteristics of glass ceiling effects. Outcomes are not affected by relative group size. We discuss implications for group orientation to dominance and individuals' motivations to exchange

Vladimir's Choice and the Distribution of Social Resources

`Vladimir's choice' refers to the tendency for people to favor the ingroup relative to the outgroup—even when doing so requires that people sacrifice ingroup profits in absolute terms. We investigated correlates of this tendency by asking a sample of White undergraduates to complete an allocation task using a resource allocation matrix. While there was a slight tendency for Vladimir's choice to increase with increasing levels of ethnic identification, this tendency disappeared when other factors were considered. Consistent with realistic group conflict theory and social dominance theory, the tendency to make Vladimir's choice increased with increasing levels of perceived intergroup competition and social dominance orientation

Social Dominance Orientation: A Personality Variable Predicting Social and Political Attitudes

Social dominance orientation (SDO), one's degree of preference for inequality among social groups, is introduced. On the basis of social dominance theory, it is shown that (a) men are more social dominance-oriented than women, (b) high-SDO people seek hierarchy-enhancing professional roles and low-SDO people seek hierarchy-attenuating roles, (c) SDO was related to beliefs in a large number of social and political ideologies that support group-based hierarchy (e.g., meritocracy and racism) and to support for policies that have implications for intergroup relations (e.g., war, civil rights, and social programs), including new policies. SDO was distinguished from interpersonal dominance, conservatism, and authoritariansim. SDO was negatively correlated with empathy, tolerance, communality, and altruism. The ramifications of SDO in social context are discussed.African and African American StudiesPsycholog

"I have a dream": A typology of social change goals

publication-status: PublishedThis is an open access article that is freely available in ORE or from the publisher's web site. Please cite the published version.To date, there is little in the way of theorizing or empirical work on the imagined endpoint of political action aimed at social change – the type of “dream” those engaged in action are attempting to bring into fruition. We suggest that previous approaches have focused narrowly on one type of social change – amelioration of collective grievances. In contrast, we argue that social change is much richer and imaginative than this narrow focus suggests. In the present article we draw on key constructs in social psychology (e.g., goals, efficacy, legitimacy, identity, social system, and social value) in order to develop a typology of social change goals. In doing so, we explain why people might support one type of social change (e.g., revolution) versus others (e.g., separatism or amelioration). The typology is used to discuss future directions for research and to highlight the implications for psychological (and broader) approaches to social change.ESRC overseas visitors awar

International support for the Arab uprisings: Understanding sympathetic collective action using theories of social dominance and social identity

Inspired by the popular Arab protests against oppressive regimes that began in 2010, people around the world protested in sympathy with the Arab peoples. The present research draws on two major theories of intergroup relations to develop an initial integrative model of sympathetic collective action. We incorporate social dominance theory’s (SDT) concept of (rejectionist) legitimizing myths with the solidarity and emotional mediation concept of the social identity model of collective action (SIMCA) to understand motivations for sympathetic collective action among bystanders. Using data from 12 nations (N = 1,480), we tested three models: (a) SIMCA (i.e., solidarity, anger, and efficacy), (b) a social dominance theory model of collective action (i.e., social dominance orientation and ideologies concerning Arab competence), and (c) an integrated model of sympathetic collective action combining both theories. Results find the greatest support for an integrated model of collective action. Discussion focuses on theoretical pluralism and suggestions for future research

The limited impact of adverse experiences on worldviews and ideologies

The impact of adverse experiences on clinical symptoms has been consistently demonstrated, but their impact on ideologies and worldviews has been rarely tested empirically. It has been long assumed that threatening experiences increase Dangerous World Beliefs (DWB) and Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA), whereas scarcity experiences increase Competitive World Beliefs (CWB) and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO). Here we assess whether self-reports of these adverse experiences are associated with clinical symptoms, worldviews and ideologies across two distinct studies (Ntotal = 1,108). Study 1 comprised Brazilian youth (13–17 years old) and results indicated that adverse experiences are consistently associated with depression, anxiety and stress but only marginally associated with DWB, RWA, CWB and SDO. Study 2 comprised male prisoners with a higher degree of adverse experiences and similar results were observed, as adverse experiences were mostly unrelated to worldviews and ideologies. Comprehensively, this research challenges the theoretical foundations of worldviews and ideological development, posing questions to the existing models and advocating for new frameworks that promote a shift from models grounded in clinical assumptions to frameworks focusing on social influences