What belief systems are associated with negative attitudes toward lower status groups? Does the relationship differ across higher and lower status groups? We examined the extent to which status quo supporting beliefs (social dominance orientation and conservatism) were associated with negative attitudes toward African Americans and whether the strength of the relationship varied between members of higher and lower status racial groups. On explicit and implicit measures, status quo supporting beliefs were associated with negative attitudes toward African Americans among members of higher (White) and lower status (Black, Hispanic, and Asian) racial groups. The association was stronger among Whites than racial minorities and was stronger among Asians and Latinos than Blacks. Status quo supporting beliefs are associated with negative attitudes toward lower status groups regardless of one’s group status, but the strength of the association is greatest among the societally advantaged.
AbramsD. (1992). Processes of social identification. In BreakwellG. (Ed.), The social psychology of the self-concept (pp. 57–100). London, England: Academic Press.
2.
AllportG. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Cambridge, MA: Addison- Wesley.
3.
AxtJ. R. (2018). The best way to measure explicit racial attitudes is to ask about them. Social Psychological and Personality Science. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/1948550617728995
4.
BergsiekerH. B.SheltonJ. N.RichesonJ. A. (2010). To be liked versus respected: Divergent goals in interracial interactions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99, 248–264.
5.
BiernatM.CrandallC. S. (1999). Racial attitudes. In RobinsonJ. P.ShaverP. R.WrightsmanL. S. (Eds.), Measures of political attitudes (2nd ed., pp. 297–411). New York, NY: Academic Press.
6.
BoboL.KluegelJ. R. (1993). Opposition to race-targeting: Self-interest, stratification ideology, or racial attitudes?American Sociological Review, 58, 443–464.
7.
BrighamJ. C. (1993). College students’ racial attitudes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 1933–1967.
8.
ChristieR. (1991). Authoritarianism and related constructs. In RobinsonJ. P.ShaverP. R.WrightsmanL. S. (Eds.), Measures of social psychological attitudes, Vol. 1. Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes (pp. 501–571). New York, NY: Academic Press.
9.
CortlandC. I.CraigM. A.ShapiroJ. R.RichesonJ. A.NeelR.GoldsteinN. J. (2017). Solidarity through shared disadvantage: Highlighting shared experiences of discrimination improves relations between stigmatized groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113, 547–567.
10.
CraigM. A.RichesonJ. A. (2012). Coalition or derogation? How perceived discrimination influences intraminority intergroup relations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 759–777.
11.
CraigM. A.RichesonJ. A. (2014). Discrimination divides across identity dimensions: Perceived racism reduces support for gay rights and increases anti-gay bias. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 55, 169–174.
12.
CraigM. A.RichesonJ. A. (2017). Hispanic population growth engenders conservative shift among non-Hispanic racial minorities. Social Psychological and Personality Science. doi:10.1177/1948550617712029
13.
CraigM. A.RichesonJ. A. (2016). Stigma-based solidarity: Understanding the psychological foundations of conflict and coalition among members of different stigmatized groups. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25, 21–27.
14.
CrosbyF. (1984). The denial of personal discrimination. American Behavioral Scientist, 27, 371–386.
15.
CunninghamW. A.NezlekJ. B.BanajiM. R. (2004). Implicit and explicit ethnocentrism: Revisiting the ideologies of prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 1332–1346.
16.
DasguptaN. (2004). Implicit ingroup favoritism, outgroup favoritism, and their behavioral manifestations. Social Justice Research, 17, 143–169.
17.
DavisJ. A.SmithT. W. (1991). The NORC general social survey: A user’s guide (Vol. 1). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
18.
DayM. V.FiskeS. T. (2017). Movin’on up? How perceptions of social mobility affect our willingness to defend the system. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8, 267–274.
19.
De HouwerJ.Teige-MocigembaS.SpruytA.MoorsA. (2009). Implicit measures: A normative analysis and review. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 347–368.
20.
DiekmanA. B.EaglyA. H.KulesaP. (2002). Accuracy and bias in stereotypes about the social and political attitudes of women and men. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 268–282.
21.
DixonJ.DurrheimK.TredouxC. (2007). Intergroup contact and attitudes toward the principle and practice of racial equality. Psychological Science, 18, 867–872.
22.
DovidioJ. F.GaertnerS. L.NiemannY. F.SniderK. (2001). Racial, ethnic, and cultural differences in responding to distinctiveness and discrimination on campus: Stigma and common group identity. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 167–188.
23.
EaglyA. H.DiekmanA. B.Johannesen-SchmidtM. C.KoenigA. M. (2004). Gender gaps in sociopolitical attitudes: A social psychological analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 796–816.
24.
FeldmanS.HuddyL. (2005). Racial resentment and white opposition to race-conscious programs: Principles or prejudice?American Journal of Political Science, 49, 168–183.
25.
FiedlerK.HarrisC.SchottM. (2018). Unwarranted inferences from statistical mediation tests—An analysis of articles published in 2015. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 75, 95–102.
26.
FishbachA.ShahJ. Y. (2006). Self-control in action: implicit dispositions toward goals and away from temptations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 820–832.
GaertnerS. L.DovidioJ. F. (2014). Reducing intergroup bias: The common ingroup identity model. London, England: Psychology Press.
29.
GrahamJ.HaidtJ.NosekB. A. (2009). Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 1029–1046.
30.
GrantP. R.BrownR. (1995). From ethnocentrism to collective protest: Responses to relative deprivation and threats to social identity. Social Psychology Quarterly, 58, 195–212.
31.
GreenwaldA. G.McGheeD. E.SchwartzJ. L. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1464–1480.
32.
GreenwaldA. G.NosekB. A.BanajiM. R. (2003). Understanding and using the implicit association test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 197–216.
33.
GurrT. R. (1970). Why men rebel. Abingdon, England: Routledge.
34.
HennesE. P.NamH. H.SternC.JostJ. T. (2012). Not all ideologies are created equal: Epistemic, existential, and relational needs predict system-justifying attitudes. Social Cognition, 30, 669–688.
35.
HenryP. J.SearsD. O. (2002). The symbolic racism 2000 scale. Political Psychology, 23, 253–283.
36.
HoA. K.SidaniusJ.PrattoF.LevinS.ThomsenL.KteilyN.Sheehy-SkeffingtonJ. (2012). Social dominance orientation: Revisiting the structure and function of a variable predicting social and political attitudes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 583–606.
37.
HoA. K.SidaniusJ.KteilyN.Sheehy-SkeffingtonJ.PrattoF.HenkelK. E.…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.
38.
HodsonG.BusseriM. A. (2012). Bright minds and dark attitudes: Lower cognitive ability predicts greater prejudice through right-wing ideology and low intergroup contact. Psychological Science, 23, 187–195.
39.
HodsonG.HoggS. M.MacInnisC. C. (2009). The role of “dark personalities” (narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy), Big Five personality factors, and ideology in explaining prejudice. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 686–690.
40.
HoffarthM. R.JostJ. T. (2017). When ideology contradicts self-interest: Conservative opposition to same-sex marriage among sexual minorities—A commentary on Pinsof and Haselton (2016). Psychological Science, 28, 1521–1524.
JacobsonC. K. (1985). Resistance to affirmative action: Self-interest or racism?Journal of Conflict Resolution, 29, 306–329.
43.
JostJ. T. (2006). The end of the end of ideology. American Psychologist, 61, 651–670.
44.
JostJ. T.BanajiM. R. (1994). The role of stereotyping in system-justification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 1–27.
45.
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, 881–919.
46.
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.
47.
JostJ. T.HunyadyO. (2005). Antecedents and consequences of system-justifying ideologies. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 260–265.
48.
JostJ. T.PelhamB. W.SheldonO.Ni SullivanB. (2003). Social inequality and the reduction of ideological dissonance on behalf of the system: Evidence of enhanced system justification among the disadvantaged. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 13–36.
49.
KahnK.HoA. K.SidaniusJ.PrattoF. (2009). The space between us and them: Perceptions of status differences. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 12, 591–604.
50.
KatzI.HassR. G. (1988). Racial ambivalence and American value conflict: Correlational and priming studies of dual cognitive structures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 893–905.
51.
KayA. C.FriesenJ. (2011). On social stability and social change: Understanding when system justification does and does not occur. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20, 360–364.
52.
KinderD. R.SandersL. M. (1996). American politics and political economy. Divided by color: Racial politics and democratic ideals. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
53.
KinderD. R.SearsD. O. (1981). Prejudice and politics: Symbolic racism versus racial threats to the good life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 414–431.
54.
KlandermansB. (1997). The social psychology of protest. Cambridge, England: Blackwell.
55.
KravitzD. A.KlinebergS. L. (2000). Reactions to two versions of affirmative action among Whites, Blacks, and Hispanics. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 597–611.
56.
KuglerM. B.CooperJ.NosekB. A. (2010). Group-based dominance and opposition to equality correspond to different psychological motives. Social Justice Research, 23, 117–155.
57.
KurdiB.SeitchikA. E.AxtJ. R.CarrollT. J.KarapetyanA.KaushikN.…BanajiM. (in press). Relationship between the implicit association test and intergroup behavior: A meta-analysis. American Psychologist.
58.
LewisR. J.DerlegaV. J.GriffinJ. L.KrowinskiA. C. (2003). Stressors for gay men and lesbians: Life stress, gay-related stress, stigma consciousness, and depressive symptoms. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 22, 716–729.
59.
MageeJ. C.GalinskyA. D. (2008). Social hierarchy: The self-reinforcing nature of power and status. Academy of Management Annals, 2, 351–398.
60.
MacKinnonD. P.FairchildA. J.FritzM. S. (2007). Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 593–614.
61.
McConahayJ. B. (1986). Modern racism, ambivalence, and the Modern Racism Scale. In DovidioJ. F.GaertnerS. L. (Eds.), Prejudice, Discrimination, and Racism (pp. 91–125). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
62.
NosekB. A.BanajiM. R.JostJ. T. (2009). The politics of intergroup attitudes. In JostJ. T.KayA. C.ThorisdottirH. (Eds.), The social and psychological bases of ideology and system justification (pp. 480–506). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
63.
NosekB. A.Bar-AnanY.SriramN.AxtJ.R.GreenwaldA. G. (2014). Understanding and using the brief implicit association test: Recommended scoring procedures. PloS ONE, 9, e110938.
64.
NosekB. A.SmythF. L.HansenJ. J.DevosT.LindnerN. M.RanganathK. A.…BanajiM. R. (2007). Pervasiveness and correlates of implicit attitudes and stereotypes. European Review of Social Psychology, 18, 36–88.
PacilliM. G.TaurinoA.JostJ. T.van der ToornJ. (2011). System justification, right-wing conservatism, and internalized homophobia: Gay and lesbian attitudes toward same-sex parenting in Italy. Sex Roles, 65, 580–595.
67.
PayneB. K.KrosnickJ. A.PasekJ.LelkesY.AkhtarO.TompsonT. (2010). Implicit and explicit prejudice in the 2008 American presidential election. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 367–374.
68.
PeffleyM.HurwitzJ.SnidermanP. M. (1997). Racial stereotypes and whites’ political views of blacks in the context of welfare and crime. American Journal of Political Science, 41, 30–60.
69.
PettigrewT. F.MeertensR. W. (1995). Subtle and blatant prejudice in Western Europe. European Journal of Social Psychology, 25, 57–75.
70.
PodsakoffP. M.MacKenzieS. B.LeeJ. Y.PodsakoffN. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903.
71.
SaucierD. A.MillerC. T. (2003). The persuasiveness of racial arguments as a subtle measure of racism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 1303–1315.
72.
SchmittM. T.BranscombeN. R. (2002). The meaning and consequences of perceived discrimination in disadvantaged and privileged social groups. European Review of Social Psychology, 12, 167–199.
73.
SedikidesC.HepperE. G. (2009). Self-improvement. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 3, 899–917.
74.
SidaniusJ.PrattoF. (2001). Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
75.
SidaniusJ.PrattoF. (2004). Social dominance theory: A new synthesis. In: JostJ. T.SidaniusJ. (Eds.), Political psychology: Key readings (pp. 315–332). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
76.
SidaniusJ.PrattoF.BoboL. (1996). Racism, conservatism, affirmative action, and intellectual sophistication: A matter of principled conservatism or group dominance?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 476–490.
77.
SidaniusJ.PrattoF.MartinM.StallworthL. M. (1991). Consensual racism and career track: Some implications of social dominance theory. Political Psychology, 12, 91–721.
78.
SternC.BalcetisE.ColeS.WestT. V.CarusoE. M. (2016). Government instability shifts skin tone representations of and intentions to vote for political candidates. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110, 76–95.
79.
TajfelH.TurnerJ. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In AustinW. G.WorchelS. (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
80.
TerrizziJ. A.JrShookN. J.VentisW. L. (2010). Disgust: A predictor of social conservatism and prejudicial attitudes toward homosexuals. Personality and Individual Differences, 49, 587–592.
81.
TropeY. (1986). Self-enhancement and self-assessment in achievement behavior. In SorrentinoR. M.HigginsE. T. (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations of social behavior (Vol. 1, pp. 350–378). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
82.
van der ToornJ.JostJ. T.PackerD. J.NoorbaloochiS.Van BavelJ. J. (2017). In defense of tradition: Religiosity, conservatism, and opposition to same-sex marriage in North America. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43, 1455–1468.
83.
ViechtbauerW. (2007). Confidence intervals for the amount of heterogeneity in meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine, 26, 37–52.
84.
ViechtbauerW. (2010). Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. Journal of Statistical Software, 36, 1–48.
85.
VorauerJ. D.HunterA. J.MainK. J.RoyS. A. (2000). Meta-stereotype activation: Evidence from indirect measures for specific evaluative concerns experienced by members of dominant groups in intergroup interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 690–707.
86.
VorauerJ. D.MainK. J.O’ConnellG. B. (1998). How do individuals expect to be viewed by members of lower status groups? Content and implications of meta-stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 917–937.
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.
