Frank Asbrock

Right‐wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation and the dimensions of generalized prejudice: A longitudinal test

A Dual Process Model (DPM) approach to prejudice proposes that there should be at least two dimensions of generalized prejudice relating to outgroup stratification and social perception, which should be differentially predicted by Right‐Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO). The current study assessed the causal effects of SDO and RWA on three dimensions of prejudice using a full cross‐lagged longitudinal sample (N = 127). As expected, RWA, but not SDO, predicted prejudice towards ‘dangerous’ groups, SDO, but not RWA, predicted prejudice towards ‘derogated’ groups, and both RWA and SDO predicted prejudice towards ‘dissident’ groups. Results support previously untested causal predictions derived from the DPM and indicate that different forms of prejudice result from different SDO‐ and RWA‐based motivational processes. Copyright

Personality and prejudice: Extension to the HEXACO personality model

We modelled the associations between the HEXACO dimensions of personality, Social Dominance Orientation (SDO), Right–Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and prejudice towards dangerous, derogated and dissident groups (N = 454 undergraduates). Consistent with a Big–Five model, low Openness to Experience predicted RWA and therefore dangerous and dissident group prejudice. As predicted, low Emotionality (and Openness) rather than Agreeableness predicted SDO and therefore derogated and dissident group prejudice. Comparison with meta–analytic averages of Big–Five data supported expected similarities and differences in the association of Big–Five and HEXACO models of personality with ideology. Finally, Honesty–Humility simultaneously predicted increases in RWA but decreases in SDO, and thus opposing effects on prejudice. These opposing effects have gone unidentified in research employing Big–Five models of personality structure. Copyright

Differential Effects of Intergroup Contact for Authoritarians and Social Dominators: A Dual Process Model Perspective

Intergroup contact is among the most effective ways to improve intergroup attitudes. Research examining whether the effects of contact are contingent on individual differences is limited, however. The authors test a dual process model perspective of individual differences in contact and prejudice. Their model predicts that intergroup contact should be particularly effective for people high in right-wing authoritarianism, but not those high in social dominance orientation, because these ideological attitudes are driven by different underlying motivational goals. The authors confirm these hypotheses in longitudinal (N = 805) and cross-sectional (N = 1,343) national probability samples. They also isolate perceived social threat, but not competitive threat, as a mediator for the interaction of right-wing authoritarianism and contact on prejudice. The authors elaborate on the individual difference mechanisms that facilitate and inhibit the effects of intergroup contact on prejudice and discuss how these relations may depend on contextual factors and the varying functions of prejudice.

Side Effects of Multiculturalism The Interaction Effect of a Multicultural Ideology and Authoritarianism on Prejudice and Diversity Beliefs

We studied the influence of right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) on the relationship between a multicultural ideology and attitudes about ethnic diversity and immigrants. We hypothesized that a multicultural ideology poses a threat to authoritarian individuals, which leads to a decrease in positive diversity beliefs and an increase in prejudice toward immigrants. On the basis of representative survey-data from 23 European countries, we showed that the negative relationship between RWA and positive diversity beliefs was stronger the more a country engages in multiculturalism (Study 1). In addition, in two experiments we demonstrated that RWA moderated the relationship between a video promoting multiculturalism (Study 2) or a picture showing a multicultural group (Study 3) and attitudes toward immigrants and diversity. As expected, for high-RWAs, both stimuli led to an increase in prejudice. In Study 3, perceived threat mediated the relationship between a multicultural norm and prejudice for people high in RWA.

Authoritarian reactions to terrorist threat: Who is being threatened, the Me or the We?

Endorsement of authoritarian attitudes has been observed to increase under conditions of terrorist threat. However, it is not clear whether this effect is a genuine response to perceptions of personal or collective threat. We investigated this question in two experiments using German samples. In the first experiment (N = 144), both general and specific authoritarian tendencies increased after asking people to imagine that they were personally affected by terrorism. No such effect occurred when they were made to think about Germany as a whole being affected by terrorism. This finding was replicated and extended in a second experiment (N = 99), in which personal and collective threat were manipulated orthogonally. Authoritarian and ethnocentric (ingroup bias) reactions occurred only for people highly identified with their national ingroup under personal threat, indicating that authoritarian responses may operate as a group-level coping strategy for a threat to the personal self. Again, we found no effects for collective threat. In both studies, authoritarianism mediated the effects of personal threat on more specific authoritarian and ethnocentric reactions. These results suggest that the effects of terrorist threat on authoritarianism can, at least in part, be attributed to a sense of personal insecurity, raised under conditions of terrorist threat. We discuss the present findings with regard to basic sociomotivational processes (e.g., group-based control restoration, terror management) and how these may relate to recent models of authoritarianism.

“Who Are These Foreigners Anyway?” The Content of the Term Foreigner and Its Impact on Prejudice

The term foreigners is often used in prejudice research to analyze prejudice toward immigrants, but it is not specified which groups respondents have in mind. In the present study, we analyzed the content of the term foreigner and its impact on prejudice toward foreigners in a German national probability sample (N = 1,763). Results indicated that most respondents think of people with a Turkish migration background, but regional differences between East and West Germany occurred. In addition, the different individual meanings connected with the term foreigner go along with different levels of prejudice against foreigners: Differences in prejudice toward foreigners between East and West Germany are partially due to different groups associated with the term foreigner. Theoretical and practical implications for quantitative prejudice research are discussed.

Friend or Foe, Champ or Chump? Social Conformity and Superiority Goals Activate Warmth-Versus Competence-Based Social Categorization Schemas

Evaluations of individuals and social groups refer to two basic dimensions of social judgment: warmth and competence. Although previous research has explored the antecedents and consequences of these evaluations, there is a lack of understanding of the conditions under which warmth and competence information is used for social categorization in the first place. The present research developed a novel measure of individuals’ tendencies to categorize persons in terms of competence versus warmth and tested whether these tendencies are predicted by chronic (Study 1, N = 301) and experimentally induced (Study 2, N = 69) social conformity and superiority goals. Social conformity goals predicted greater relative use of warmth information, while superiority goals predicted greater relative use of competence information in categorizing persons. These findings attest to the relevance of chronic as well as contextually induced goals at an early stage of social information processing related to social categorization.

Ambivalent stereotypes link to peace, conflict, and inequality across 38 nations

Significance Stereotypes reflect a society’s inequality and conflict, providing a diagnostic map of intergroup relations. This stereotype map’s fundamental dimensions depict each group’s warmth (friendly, sincere) and competence (capable, skilled). Some societies cluster groups as high on both (positive “us”) vs. low on both (negative “them”). Other societies, including the United States, have us-them clusters but add ambivalent ones (high on one dimension, low on the other). This cross-national study shows peace-conflict predicts ambivalence. Extremely peaceful and conflictual nations both display unambivalent us-them patterns, whereas intermediate peace-conflict predicts high ambivalence. Replicating previous work, higher inequality predicts more ambivalent stereotype clusters. Inequality and intermediate peace-conflict each use ambivalent stereotypes, explaining complicated intergroup relations and maintaining social system stability. A cross-national study, 49 samples in 38 nations (n = 4,344), investigates whether national peace and conflict reflect ambivalent warmth and competence stereotypes: High-conflict societies (Pakistan) may need clearcut, unambivalent group images distinguishing friends from foes. Highly peaceful countries (Denmark) also may need less ambivalence because most groups occupy the shared national identity, with only a few outcasts. Finally, nations with intermediate conflict (United States) may need ambivalence to justify more complex intergroup-system stability. Using the Global Peace Index to measure conflict, a curvilinear (quadratic) relationship between ambivalence and conflict highlights how both extremely peaceful and extremely conflictual countries display lower stereotype ambivalence, whereas countries intermediate on peace-conflict present higher ambivalence. These data also replicated a linear inequality–ambivalence relationship.

Authoritarian Disbeliefs in Diversity

ABSTRACT Ethnic diversity poses a threat to authoritarians, as it indicates non-conformism to group norms and poses a threat to group conformity. According to authoritarian dynamic theory, threats elicit authoritarian reactions in people with authoritarian predispositions. In the present article we tested a mediation model derived from authoritarian dynamic theory in a sample of 171 students. As expected, authoritarian predisposition negatively predicted diversity beliefs. This effect was fully mediated by an authoritarian manifestation, that is, authoritarian aggression. The two other components of right-wing authoritarianism, authoritarian submission and conventionalism, did not mediate the effect. Results confirm contemporary research on authoritarianism and the differentiation of authoritarian predispositions and its manifestations.

The Diversity Challenge for High and Low Authoritarians: Multilevel and Longitudinal Effects Through Intergroup Contact and Threat:

The current studies integrate different frameworks on the positive and negative consequences of ethnic diversity for intergroup relations. Using a nationally stratified sample of Dutch majority members (N = 680) from 50 cities in the Netherlands, Study 1 demonstrated that objective diversity was indirectly related to prejudice and to generalized, ingroup, and outgroup trust, through more positive and more negative contact. These indirect effects tended to be stronger for high versus low authoritarians. Furthermore, perceived diversity was indirectly related to less trust and greater prejudice, via more negative contact and threat. Again, these associations were more pronounced among high authoritarians. Study 2, using a representative sample of German majority members (N = 412) nested within 237 districts, replicated the cross-sectional results regarding objective diversity and prejudice. In addition, longitudinal analyses indicated that objective diversity predicted more positive and more negative contact 2 years later, though only among moderate and high authoritarians.