Adaptación de la escala de Orientación a la Dominancia Social al castellano: validación de la Dominancia Grupal y la Oposición a la Igualdad como factores subyacentes
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online January, 2007
Adaptación de la escala de Orientación a la Dominancia Social al castellano: validación de la Dominancia Grupal y la Oposición a la Igualdad como factores subyacentes
Pratto, Sidanius, Stallwarth y Malle (1994) formularon la Teoría de la Dominancia Social para expresar el deseo de los individuos por establecer y mantener la jerarquía social y la subordinación de grupos inferiores a los superiores. Para medir las diferencias individuales en este constructo elaboraron la escala de la Orientación a la Dominancia Social (SDO). Recientes investigaciones han señalado la existencia de una estructura bifactorial de la escala: Antiigualitarismo y Orientación a la Dominancia Grupal (Jost y Thompson, 2000; Sidanius y Peña, 2002), a pesar de que en la formulación original se abogaba por la presencia de un constructo unitario.
El presente estudio tiene como finalidad validar la escala de Orientación a la Dominancia Social en una muestra española, así como comprobar qué estructura factorial es más adecuada. Nuestros resultados muestran una buena fiabilidad de la adaptación y validez predictiva. Por su parte, los análisis factoriales realizados muestran un mejor apoyo para la estructura en dos factores propuesta por Jost y Thompson (2000).
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdornoT. W.Frenkel-BrunswickE.LevinsonD. J.SandfordN. (1950) The authoritarian personality.Buenos Aires: Proyección.
2.
AltemeyerB. (1981). Enemies of freedom.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
3.
AltemeyerB. (1998). The authoritarian spectra.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
4.
BaronR.KennyD. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1191.
5.
BentlerM. P.DudgeonP. (1996). Covariance structure analysis: Statistical pratice, theory and directions. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 563–592.
6.
BrowneM. W.KudeckR. (1993). Alternative ways of assesing model fit. EnBollenK. A.LongJ. S. (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
7.
BustillosA.Silván-ferreroM. P. (2005). Social dominance and Authoritarianism: Differential mediation with Blatant and Subtle Prejudice.14th General Meeting EAESP.Wuzburg: Alemania.
8.
DuckittJ. (2001). A dual-process cognitive-motivational theory of ideology and prejudice. EnZannaM. P. (Ed.), Advance in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 33, pp. 41–113). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
9.
DuriezB.Van HielA. (2002). The march of modern fascism. A comparison of social dominance orientation and authoritarianism. Personality and Individual Differences, 32, 1199–1213.
10.
HenryP. J.SidaniusJ.LevinS.PrattoF. (2005). Social Dominance Orientation, Authoritarianism, and Support for Intergroup Violence Between the Middle East and America. Political Psychology, 26, 569–583.
11.
JöreskongK. G.SörbomD. (1979). Advances in Factor Analysis and Structural Equation Models.Cambridge, MA: ABT Books.
12.
JostJ. T.BanajiM. R. (1994). The role of stereotyping in system-justification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33 (1), 1–27.
13.
JostJ. T.BanajiM. R.NosekB. A. (2004). A Decade of System Justification Theory: Accumulated Evidence of Conscious and Unconscious Bolstering of the Status Quo. Political Psychology, 25 (6), 881–920.
14.
JostJ. T.BurgessD. (2000). Attitudinal ambivalence and the conflict between group and system justification motives in low status groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 293–305.
15.
JostJ. T.FitzsimonsG. I.KayA. C.GreenbergJ.KooleS. L.PyszczynskiT. (2004). The Ideological Animal: A System Justification View. EnHandbook of Experimental Existential Psychology (pp. 263–283). Nueva York: Guilford Press.
16.
JostJ. T.HunyadyO. (2002). The psychology of system justification and the palliative function of ideology. European Review of social Psychology, 13, 111–153.
17.
JostJ. T.ThompsonE. P. (2000). Group-based dominance and opposition to equality as independent predictors of self- esteem, ethnocentrism, and social policy attitudes among African Americans and European Americans. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 36, 209–232.
18.
LippaR.AradS. (1999). Gender, personality, and prejudice: The display of authoritarianism and social dominance in interviews with college men and women. Journal of Research in Personality, 33, 463–493.
19.
OverbeckJ.JostJ. T.MossoC.FlizikA. (2004). Resistant vs. acquiescent responses to ingroup inferiority as a function of social dominance orientation in the USA and Italy. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 7, 35–54.
20.
PetticrewT. F.MeertensR. W. (1995). Subtle and blatant prejudice in Western Europe. European Journal of Social Psychology, 25, 57–75.
21.
PrattoF.LiuJ.LevinS.SidaniusJ.ShihM.BachrachH.HegartyP. (2000). Social dominance and the legitimization of inequality across cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31, 369–409.
22.
PrattoF.SidaniusJ.StallworthL. MMalleB. F. (1994). Social Dominance Orientation: A Personality Variable Predicting Social and Political Attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 741–763.
23.
PrattoF.StallworthL. M.SidaniusJ. (1997). The gender gap: Differences in political attitudes and social dominance orientation. British Journal of Social Psychology, 36, 49–68.
24.
SidaniusJ.FeshbachS.LevinS.PrattoF. (1997). The interface between ethnic and national attachment: Ethnic pluralism or ethnic dominance?Public Opinion Quarterly, 61, 102–133.
25.
SidaniusJ.LevinS.FedericoC. M.PrattoF. (2001). Legitimizing ideologies: The social dominance approach. EnJostJ. T.MajorB., Psychology of legitimacy: Emerging perspectives on ideology, justice, and intergroup relations (pp. 307–331). Nueva York: Cambridge University Press.
26.
SidaniusJ.LevinS.LiuJ.PrattoF. (2000). Social dominance orientation, anti-egalitarianism and the political psychology of gender: An extension and cross-cultural replication. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30 (1), 41–67.
27.
SidaniusJ.LiuJ.PrattoF.ShawJ. (1994). Social dominance orientation, hierarchy-attenuators and hierarchy-enhancers: Social theory and the criminal justice system. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24, 338–366.
28.
SidaniusJ.PeñaY. (2002). U.S. patriotism and ideologies of group dominance: A tale of asymmetry. Journal of Social Psychology, 142, 782–790.
29.
SidaniusJ.PrattoF. (1999). Social Dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression.Cambridge: University Press.
30.
SidaniusJ.PrattoF. (2004). Social Dominance Theory: a new synthesis. EnJostJ.SidaniusJ., Political Psychology (pp. 315–332). Nueva York: Psychology Press.
31.
SidaniusJ.PrattoF.BoboL. (1994). Social dominance orientation and the political psychology of gender: A case of invariance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 998–1100.
32.
SidaniusJ.PrattoF.BriefD. (1995). Group dominance and the political psychology of gender: A cross-cultural comparison. Political Psychology, 16, 381–396.
33.
SidaniusJ.PrattoF.RabinowitzJ. L. (1994). Gender, ethnic status, and ideological asymmetry: A social dominance interpretation. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 25, 194–216.
34.
SidaniusJ.PrattoF.Van LaarC.LevinS. (2004). The Social Dominance Theory: Its Adenda and Method. Political Psychology, 25 (6), 845–800.
35.
Silván-ferreroM. P.Montes-BergesB. (2004). Evaluación de la personalidad autoritaria: Estudio piloto de la escala de Altemeyer.VII European Conference on Psychological Assesment, Málaga.
36.
Van HielA.MervieldeI. (2002). Explaining conservative beliefs and political preferences: A comparison of social dominance orientation and authoritarianism. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 965–976.
37.
Van HielA.PandelaereM.DuriezB. (2004). The impact of need for closure on conservative beliefs and racism: Differential mediation by authoritarian submission and authoritarian dominance. Personality Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 824–837.
38.
WhitleyB. E. (1999). Right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 126–134.
