Against the backdrop of significant social and political change in the US, dominant groups’ perceptions of discrimination against their group have increased. Previous research shows that group threat and legitimizing beliefs augment these perceptions. However, the concurrent role of individuals’ attitudes towards hierarchy in perceived discrimination has not been examined. In the present research, we investigate whether social dominance orientation (SDO) and group threat (status and moral image threat) interact to predict perceived discrimination among two dominant groups, White Americans and men. Furthermore, we test whether their perceived discrimination predicts less support for policies benefitting minorities and immigrants, and women, respectively. Across two correlational studies (Studies 1 and 2) and one experiment (Study 3), we found little support for the proposed interaction between SDO and group threat; instead, they were independent predictors of the outcomes. By testing SDO and perceived group threats simultaneously, these studies contribute to the literature by showing that group-based and hierarchy-based concerns play distinct roles in perceived discrimination among dominant groups.
AikenL. S.WestS. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. SAGE.
2.
AllpressJ. A.BrownR.Giner-SorollaR.DeonnaJ. A.TeroniF. (2014). Two faces of group-based shame: Moral shame and image shame differentially predict positive and negative orientations to ingroup wrongdoing. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40, 1270–1284. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167214540724
3.
American National Election Studies, University of Michigan, & Stanford University. (2017). ANES 2016 Time Series study (ICPSR 36824). https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR36824.v2
4.
BeaujeanA. A. (2014). Sample size determination for regression models using Monte Carlo methods in R. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 19, Article 12. https://doi.org/10.7275/d5pv-8v28
5.
BeitschR. (2018). #MeToo has changed our culture. Now it’s changing our laws. The PEW Charitable Trusts. https://pew.org/2M66sSP
BentlerP. M. (1995). EQS structural equations program manual. Multivariate Software.
8.
BlumerH. (1958). Race prejudice as a sense of group position. The Pacific Sociological Review, 1, 3–7. https://doi.org/10.2307/1388607
9.
BrownR. M.CraigM. A. (2020). Intergroup inequality heightens reports of discrimination along alternative identity dimensions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 46, 869–884. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167219880186
10.
ChapleauK. M.OswaldD. L. (2014). A system justification view of sexual violence: Legitimizing gender inequality and reduced moral outrage are connected to greater rape myth acceptance. Journal of Trauma & Dissociation, 15, 204–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/15299732.2014.867573
11.
ChowR. M.LoweryB. S.HoganC. M. (2013). Appeasement: Whites’ strategic support for affirmative action. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 332–345. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167212475224
CohrsJ. C.KielmannS.MaesJ.MoschnerB. (2005). Effects of right-wing authoritarianism and threat from terrorism on restriction of civil liberties. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 5, 263–276. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-2415.2005.00071.x
14.
ColeE. R. (2009). Intersectionality and research in psychology. American Psychologist, 64, 170–180. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014564
15.
CraigM. A.RichesonJ. A. (2014a). More diverse yet less tolerant? How the increasingly diverse racial landscape affects White Americans’ racial attitudes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40, 750–761. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167214524993
16.
CraigM. A.RichesonJ. A. (2014b). On the precipice of a “majority-minority” America: Perceived status threat from the racial demographic shift affects White Americans’ political ideology. Psychological Science, 25, 1189–1197. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614527113
17.
CraigM. A.RichesonJ. A. (2017). Information about the US racial demographic shift triggers concerns about anti-White discrimination among the prospective White “minority.”PLoS ONE, 12, Article e0185389. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0185389
18.
DanboldF.HuoY. J. (2015). No longer “all-American”? Whites’ defensive reactions to their numerical decline. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 6, 210–218. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550614546355
DoverT. L.MajorB.KaiserC. R. (2016). Members of high-status groups are threatened by pro-diversity organizational messages. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 62, 58–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2015.10.006
FedericoC. M.SidaniusJ. (2002). Racism, ideology, and affirmative action revisited: The antecedents and consequences of “principled objections” to affirmative action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 488–502. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.4.488
23.
GallagherC. A. (2013). Playing the White ethnic card: Using ethnic identity to deny contemporary racism. In DoaneA. W.Bonilla SilvaE. (Eds.), White out (pp. 145–158). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203412107-19
GutiérrezA. S.UnzuetaM. M. (2013). Are admissions decisions based on family ties fairer than those that consider race? Social dominance orientation and attitudes toward legacy vs. affirmative action policies. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49, 554–558. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2012.10.011
HoA. K.SidaniusJ.KteilyN.Sheehy-SkeffingtonJ.PrattoF.HenkelK. E.FoelsR.StewartA. L. (2015). The nature of social dominance orientation: Theorizing and measuring preferences for intergroup inequality using the new SDO7 scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109, 1003–1028. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000033
30.
HooperD.CoughlanJ.MullenM. R. (2008). Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6, 53–60. https://doi.org/10.21427/D7CF7R
31.
JackmanM. J. (1994). The velvet glove. University of California Press.
32.
JacksonL. M.EssesV. M. (2000). Effects of perceived economic competition on people’s willingness to help empower immigrants. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 3, 419–435. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430200003004006
33.
JostJ. T.KayA. C. (2005). Exposure to benevolent sexism and complementary gender stereotypes: Consequences for specific and diffuse forms of system justification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 498–509. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.88.3.498
34.
JunS.LoweryB. S.GuilloryL. (2017). Keeping minorities happy: Hierarchy maintenance and Whites’ decreased support for highly identified White politicians. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43(12), 1615–1629.
35.
KahalonR.ShnabelN.HalabiS.SimanTov-NachlieliI. (2019). Power matters: The role of power and morality needs in competitive victimhood among advantaged and disadvantaged groups. British Journal of Social Psychology, 58, 452–472. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12276
36.
KlineR. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). The Guilford Press.
37.
KnowlesE. D.LoweryB. S.HoganC. M.ChowR. M. (2009). On the malleability of ideology: Motivated construals of color blindness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 857–869. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013595
38.
KteilyN.BruneauE. (2017). Backlash: The politics and real-world consequences of minority group dehumanization. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43, 87–104. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167216675334
39.
KteilyN.HoA. K.SidaniusJ. (2012). Hierarchy in the mind: The predictive power of social dominance orientation across social contexts and domains. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 543–549. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.11.007
40.
MajorB.GramzowR. H.McCoyS. K.LevinS.SchmaderT.SidaniusJ. (2002). Perceiving personal discrimination: The role of group status and legitimizing ideology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 269–282. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.82.3.269
41.
McClanahanK. J.HoA. K.KteilyN. S. (2019). Which group to credit (and blame)? Whites make attributions about White-minority biracials’ successes and failures based on their own (anti-)egalitarianism and ethnic identification. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 22, 631–654. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430218784665
42.
McCoyS. K.MajorB. (2007). Priming meritocracy and the psychological justification of inequality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 341–351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2006.04.009
OuttenH. R.LeeT.Costa-LopesR.SchmittM. T.ValaJ. (2018). Majority group members’ negative reactions to future demographic shifts depend on the perceived legitimacy of their status: Findings from the United States and Portugal. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 79. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00079
45.
PerezM. J.SalterP. S. (2020). A critical race reading of collective victimhood: The precarious case of Black Americans. In VollhardtJ. R. (Ed.), The social psychology of collective victimhood (pp. 319–336). Oxford University Press.
46.
PinheiroJ.BatesD.DebRoyS.SarkarD. & R Core Team. (2017). NLME: Linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. R package version 3. 1–131.
47.
PrattoF.SidaniusJ.StallworthL. M.MalleB. F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 741–763. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.4.741
48.
PrattoF.SidaniusJ.LevinS. (2006). Social dominance theory and the dynamics of intergroup relations: Taking stock and looking forward. European review of social psychology, 17(1), 271–320.
49.
Public Religion Research Institute. (2011). PRRI poll: Pluralism, Immigration and Civic Integration Survey (Version 2) [Dataset]. Cornell University; Roper Center for Public Opinion Research. https://doi.org/10.25940/ROPER-31096429
50.
QuistR. M.ResendezM. G. (2002). Social dominance threat: Examining social dominance theory’s explanation of prejudice as legitimizing myths. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 24, 287–293. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15324834BASP2404_4
51.
RabinowitzJ. L. (1999). Go with the flow or fight the power? The interactive effects of social dominance orientation and perceived injustice on support for the status quo. Political Psychology, 20, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/0162-895X.00135
52.
R Core Team. (2017). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. (Version 3.4.2) [Computer software] https://www.R-project.org/
ScheepersD.EllemersN. (2018). Stress and the stability of social systems: A review of neurophysiological research. European Review of Social Psychology, 29, 340–376. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463283.2018.1543149
56.
ShumanE.JohnsonD.SaguyT.HalperinE. (2018). Threat to the group’s image can motivate high identifiers to take action against in-group transgressions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 44, 1523–1544. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167218768800
57.
SidaniusJ.PrattoF. (1999). Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. Cambridge University Press.
58.
SmithH. J.PettigrewT. F.PippinG. M.BialosiewiczS. (2012). Relative deprivation: A theoretical and meta-analytic review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16, 203–232. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868311430825
59.
SmithT. W.HoutM.MarsdenP. V. (2016). General Social Survey, 1972–2014 [Cumulative file]. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR36319.v2
60.
SteigerJ. H.LindJ. C. (1980, May). Statistically based tests for the number of common factors. The Annual Spring Meeting of the Psychometric Society, Iowa City, IA, United States.
61.
SullivanD.LandauM. J.BranscombeN. R.RothschildZ. K. (2012). Competitive victimhood as a response to accusations of ingroup harm doing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 778–795. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026573
62.
TabachnickB. G.FidellL. S. (2012). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Pearson Education.
63.
TajfelH.TurnerJ. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In AustinW. G.WorchelS. (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Brooks/Cole Publishers.
64.
TawaJ.SuyemotoK. L.TauriacJ. J. (2013). Triangulated threat: A model of Black and Asian race relations in a context of White dominance. In PinderS. O. (Ed.), American multicultural studies: Diversity of race, ethnicity, gender and sexuality (pp. 229–248). SAGE.
65.
ThomsenL.GreenE. G. T.HoA. K.LevinS.van LaarC.SinclairS.SidaniusJ. (2010). Wolves in sheep’s clothing: SDO asymmetrically predicts perceived ethnic victimization among White and Latino students across three years. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 225–238. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167209348617
66.
TroppL. R. (2007). Perceived discrimination and interracial contact: Predicting interracial closeness among Black and White Americans. Social Psychology Quarterly, 70, 70–81. https://doi.org/10.1177/019027250707000108
67.
TurnerJ. C.BrownR. J. (1978). Social status, cognitive alternatives and intergroup relations. In TajfelH. (Ed.), Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 201–234). Academic Press.
68.
UnzuetaM. M.EverlyB. A.GutiérrezA. S. (2014). Social dominance orientation moderates reactions to Black and White discrimination claimants. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 54, 81–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2014.04.005
69.
VasilopoulosP.MarcusG. E.ValentinoN. A.FoucaultM. (2019). Fear, anger, and voting for the far right: Evidence from theNovember13, 2015 Paris terror attacks. Political Psychology, 40, 679–704. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12513
70.
WellmanJ. D.LiuX.WilkinsC. L. (2015). Priming status-legitimizing beliefs: Examining the impact on perceived anti-White bias, zero-sum beliefs, and support for affirmative action among White people. British Journal of Social Psychology, 55, 426–437. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12133
WilkinsC. L.KaiserC. R. (2014). Racial progress as threat to the status hierarchy: Implications for perceptions of anti-White bias. Psychological Science, 25, 439–446. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613508412
74.
ZouL. X.CheryanS. (2017). Two axes of subordination: A new model of racial position. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 112, 696–717. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000080
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
