This study tested whether a measure of Social Dominance Orientation was associated with opinions about America's most serious social problem. 150 undergraduates enrolled in social problems classes responded to the 14-item scale and to an open-ended question, “In your opinion, what is the most serious social problem in our country today?”. Analysis shows that mean scale scores differed significantly across social problem responses. Correspondence analysis, plotting association between scale scores and social problem responses, was interpreted as support for social dominance theory. Higher scale scores were associated with problems of crime and negative values and lower scores with problems of education and racism.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AppelbaumL. D. (2001) The influence of perceived deservingness on policy decisions regarding aid to the poor. Political Psychology, 22, 419–442.
2.
BestJ. (Ed.) (1995) Images of issues: Typifying contemporary social problems. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine De Gruyter.
3.
BrooksC. (2002) Religious influence and the politics of family decline concern: Trends, sources and U.S. political behavior. American Sociological Review, 67, 191–211.
4.
BrooksC.ChengS. (2001) Declining government confidence and policy preferences in the U.S.: Devolution, regime effects, or symbolic change?Social Forces, 79, 1343–1375.
5.
BushmanB. S.AndersonC. A. (2001) Media violence and the American public: Scientific facts versus media misinformation. American Psychologist, 56, 477–489.
6.
CohenD. (1998) Culture, social organization, and patterns of violence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 408–419.
7.
CreminL. A. (1961) The transformation of the school: Progressivism in American education, 1876–1957. New York: Knopf.
8.
DerG.EverittB. S. (2002) A handbook of statistical analyses using SAS. (2nd ed.) Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC.
9.
EssesV. M.DovidioJ. F.JacksonL. M.ArmstrongT. L. (2001) The immigration dilemma: The role of perceived group competition, ethnic prejudice, and national identity. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 389–412.
10.
GamsonW. A. (1995) Foreword. In SassonT., Crime talk: How citizens construct a social problem. New York: Aldine de Gruyter. Pp. xi-xiii.
11.
GlazerN. (1994) How social problems are born. Public Interest, 115, 31–44.
12.
IyengarS. (1989) How citizens think about national issues: A matter of responsibility. American Journal of Political Science, 33, 878–900.
13.
JostJ. T.GlaserJ.KruglanskiA. W.SullowayF. J. (2003) Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 339–375.
14.
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.
15.
KochJ. W. (1998) Political rhetoric and political persuasion: The changing structure of citizens' preferences on health insurance during policy debate. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 62, 209–229.
16.
KrysanM. (2000) Prejudice, politics and public opinion: Understanding the sources of racial policy attitudes. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 135–168.
17.
LockE. D.TimberlakeJ. M.RasinskiK. A. (2002) Battle fatigue: Is public support waning for “war”-centered drug control strategies?Crime and Delinquency, 48, 380–398.
18.
NathansonC. A. (1999) Social movements as catalysts for policy change: The case of smoking and guns. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Taw, 24, 421–488.
19.
PetersonB. E.DotyR. M.WinterD. G. (1993) Authoritarianism and attitudes toward contemporary social issues. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 174–184.
20.
PrattoF.SidaniusJ.StaleworthL. M.MalleB. F. (1994) Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 741–763.
21.
SAS Institute, Inc. (1989) SAS/STAT user's guide (Version 6). (4th ed.) Vol. 1. Cary, NC: SAS Institute, Inc.
22.
SassonT. (1995) Crime talk: How citizens construct a social problem. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
23.
SchmittM. T.BranscombeN. R.KappenD. M. (2003) Attitudes toward group-based inequality: Social dominance or social identity?British Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 161–186.
24.
SidaniusJ.PrattoF. (1999) Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univer. Press.
25.
SidaniusJ.PrattoF.BoboL. (1994) Social dominance orientation and the political psychology of gender: A case of invariance?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 998–1011.
26.
SkitkaL. J.MullenE.GriffinT.HutchinsonS.ChamberlinB. (2002) Dispositions, scripts, or motivated correction? Understanding ideological differences in explanations for social problems. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 470–487.
27.
SmedleyA.SmedleyB. D. (2005) Race as biology is fiction, racism as a social problem is real. American Psychologist, 60, 16–26.
28.
StaffordM. C.WarrM. (1985) Public perceptions of social problems: Some propositions and a test. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 21, 307–316.
29.
StrangeJ. J.LeungC. C. (1999) How anecdotal accounts in the news and in fiction can influence judgments of a social problem's urgency, causes, and cures. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 436–449.
30.
TetlockP. E.KristelO. V.ElsonS. B.LernerJ. S. (2000) The psychology of the unthinkable: Taboo trade-offs, forbidden base rates, and heretical counterfactuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 853–870.
