Gender differences in social dominance orientation: The role of cognitive complexity

Sex Roles

Volumn 62, Issue 9, 2010, Pages 684-692

  Foels, Rob ^a   Reid, Landon D ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT   (United States)

^b Center for Language and Brain   (United States)

Author keywords

Cognitive complexity; Gender differences; Social dominance orientation

Indexed keywords

EID: 77952954160     PISSN: 03600025     EISSN: 15732762     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11199-010-9775-5     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Altemeyer, B. (1998). The other authoritarian personality. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 47-92. doi: 10. 1016/S0065-2601(08)60382-2.
2. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182. doi: 10. 1037/0022-3514. 51. 6. 1173.
3. Ben-Ari, R., Kedem, P., & Levy-Weiner, N. (1992). Cognitive complexity and intergroup perception and evaluation. Personality and Individual Differences, 13, 1291-1298. doi: 10. 1016/0191-8869(92)90171-K.
4. Bieri, J. (1955). Cognitive complexity-simplicity and predictive behavior. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 263-268. doi: 10. 1037/h0043308.
5. Blumberg, S. J., & Silvera, D. H. (1988). Attributional complexity and cognitive development: A look at the motivational and cognitive requirements for attribution. Social Cognition, 16, 253-266.
6. Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Kao, C. F. (1984). The efficient assessment of need for cognition. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 306-307. doi: 10. 1207/s15327752jpa4803_13.
7. Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Feinstein, J. A., & Jarvis, W. B. G. (1996). Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 197-253. doi: 10. 1037/0033-2909. 119. 2. 197.
8. Caricati, L. (2007). The relationship between social dominance orientation and gender: The mediating role of values. Sex Roles, 57, 159-171. doi: 10. 1007/s11199-007-9231-3.
9. Conway, M., Pizzamiglio, T., & Mount, L. (1996). Status communality, and agency: Implications for stereotypes of gender and other groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 25-38. doi: 10. 1037/0022-3514. 71. 1. 25.
10. Cornelis, I., & van Hiel, A. (2006). The impact of cognitive styles on authoritarianism based conservatism and racism. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 28, 37-50. doi: 10. 1207/s15324834basp2801_4.
11. Costanzo, M. (1992). Training students to decode verbal and nonverbal cues: Effects on confidence and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 308-313. doi: 10. 1037/0022-0663. 84. 3. 308.
12. Dambrun, M., Guimond, S., & Duarte, S. (2002). The impact of hierarchy-enhancing vs. attenuating academic major on stereotyping: The mediating role of perceived social norm. Current Research in Social Psychology, 7, 114-136.
13. Dambrun, M., Duarte, S., & Guimond, S. (2004). Why are men more likely to support group-based dominance than women?: The mediating role of gender identification. British Journal of Social Psychology, 43, 287-297. doi: 10. 1348/0144666041501714.
14. Eagly, A. H., Diekman, A. B., Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C., & Koenig, A. M. (2004). Gender gaps in sociopolitical attitudes: A social psychological analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 796-816. doi: 10. 1037/0022-3514. 87. 6. 796.
15. Esses, V. M., Jackson, L. M., & Armstrong, T. L. (1998). Intergroup competition and attitudes toward immigrants and immigration: An instrumental model of group conflict. Journal of Social Issues, 54, 699-724. doi: 10. 1111/0022-4537. 911998091.
16. Federico, C. M. (1998). The interactive effects of social dominance orientation, group status, and perceived stability on favoritism for high-status groups. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 2, 119-143. doi: 10. 1177/1368430299022002.
17. Fiske, S. T., & Dépret, E. (1996). Control, interdependence, and power: Understanding social cognition in its social context. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology, vol. 7 (pp. 31-61). New York: Wiley. doi: 10. 1080/14792779443000094.
18. Fletcher, G. J. O., Danilovics, P., Fernandez, G., Peterson, D., & Reeder, G. D. (1986). Attributional complexity: An individual differences measure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 875-884. doi: 10. 1037/0022-3514. 51. 4. 875.
19. Foels, R., & Pappas, C. J. (2004). Learning and unlearning the myths we are taught: Gender and social dominance orientation. Sex Roles, 50, 743-757. doi: 10. 1023/B: SERS. 0000029094. 25107. d6.
20. Geis, F. L., Brown, V., Jennings, J., & Corrado-Taylor, D. (1984). Sex vs. status in sex-associated stereotypes. Sex Roles, 11, 771-785. doi: 10. 1007/BF00287809.
21. Guimond, S., Dambrun, M., Michinov, N., & Duarte, S. (2003). Does social dominance generate prejudice?: Integrating individual and contextual determinates of intergroup cognitions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 697-721. doi: 10. 1037/0022-3514. 84. 4. 697.
22. Guimond, S., Chatard, A., Martinot, D., Crisp, R. J., & Redersdorff, S. (2006). Social comparison, self-stereotyping, and gender differences in self-construals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 221-242. doi: 10. 1037/0022-3514. 90. 2. 221.
23. Huang, L., & Liu, J. H. (2005). Personality and social structural implications of the situational priming of social dominance orientation. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 267-276. doi: 10. 1016/j. paid. 2004. 04. 006.
24. Jackson, L. A., & Hymes, R. W. (1985). Gender and social categorization: Familiarity and ingroup polarization in recall and evaluation. Journal of Social Psychology, 125, 81-88.
25. Joireman, J. (2004). Relationships between attributional complexity and empathy. Individual Differences Research, 2, 197-202.
26. Jost, J. T., & Thompson, E. 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. doi: 10. 1006/jesp. 1999. 1403.
27. Levin, S. (2004). Perceived group status differences and the effects of gender, ethnicity, and religion on social dominance orientation. Political Psychology, 25, 31-48.
28. Levin, S., & Sidanius, J. (1999). Social dominance and social identity in the United States and Israel: Ingroup favoritism or outgroup derogation? Political Psychology, 20, 99-126.
29. Levy, S. R. (1999). Reducing prejudice: Lessons from social-cognitive factors underlying perceiver differences in prejudice. Journal of Social Issues, 55(4), 745-765.
30. Lorenzi-Cioldi, R. (1998). Group status and perceptions of homogeneity. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology, vol. 9 (pp. 31-75). Chicester, England: Wiley. doi: 10. 1080/14792779843000045.
31. Lorenzi-Cioldi, F., Eagly, A. H., & Stewart, T. L. (1995). Homogeneity of gender groups in memory. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 31, 193-217. doi: 10. 1006/jesp. 1995. 1010.
32. MacGeorge, E. L. (2003). Gender differences in attributions and emotions in helping contexts. Sex Roles, 48, 175-182. doi: 10. 1006/jesp. 1995. 1010.
33. Medin, D. L. (1989). Concepts and conceptual structure. American Psychologist, 44, 1469-1481.
34. Park, B., & Judd, C. M. (1990). Measures and models of perceived group variability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 173-191. doi: 10. 1037/0022-3514. 59. 2. 173.
35. Pittman, T. S., & D'Agostino, P. R. (1989). Motivation and cognition: Control deprivation and the nature of subsequent information processing. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 465-480. doi: 10. 1016/0022-1031(89)90001-2.
36. Pratto, F. (1999). The puzzle of continuing group inequality: Piecing together psychological, social, and cultural forces in social dominance theory. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 31, 191-263. doi: 10. 1016/S0065-2601(08)60274-9.
37. Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L. M., & Malle, B. F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 741-763. doi: 10. 1037/0022-3514. 67. 4. 741.
38. Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., & Levin, S. (2006). Social dominance theory and the dynamics of intergroup relations: Taking stock and looking forward. European Review of Social Psychology, 17, 271-320. doi: 10. 1080/10463280601055772.
39. Ridgeway, C. L. (1991). The social construction of status value: Gender and other nominal characteristics. Social Forces, 70, 367-386. doi: 10. 2307/2580244.
40. Ridgeway, C. L., & Bourg, C. (2004). Gender as status: An expectation states theory approach. In A. H. Eagly, A. E. Beall, & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The psychology of gender. New York: Guilford.
41. Sargent, M. J. (2004). Less thought, more punishment: Need for cognition predicts support for punitive responses to crime. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 1485-1493. doi: 10. 1177/0146167204264481.
42. Schaller, M., Boyd, C., Yohannes, J., & O'Brien, M. (1995). The prejudiced personality revisited: Personal need for structure and formation of erroneous group stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 544-555. doi: 10. 1037/0022-3514. 68. 3. 544.
43. Schmitt, M. T., Branscombe, N. R., & Kappen, D. M. (2003). Attitudes toward group-based inequality: Social dominance or social identity? British Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 161-186. doi: 10. 1348/014466603322127166.
44. Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. New York: Cambridge University Press.
45. Sidanius, J., Pratto, F., Martin, M., & Stallworth, L. (1991). Consensual racism and career track: Some implications of social dominance theory. Political Psychology, 12, 691-721. doi: 10. 2307/3791552.
46. Sidanius, J., Liu, J. H., Shaw, J. S., & Pratto, F. (1994). Social dominance orientation, hierarchy attenuators and hierarchy-enhancers: Social dominance theory and the criminal justice system. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24, 338-366. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1559-1816. 1994. tb00586. x.
47. Sidanius, J., Levin, S., Liu, J., & Pratto, F. (2000). Social dominance orientation, anti-egalitarianism and the political psychology of gender: An extension and cross-cultural replication. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 41-67. doi: 10. 1002/(SICI)1099-0992(200001/02)30: 1< 41:: AID-EJSP976> 3. 0. CO; 2-O.
48. Snellman, A., Ekehammar, B., & Akrami, N. (2009). The role of gender identification in social dominance orientation: Mediating or moderating the effect of sex? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 39, 999-1012. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1559-1816. 2009. 00469. x.
49. Tam, K., Au, A., & Leung, A. K. (2008). Attributionally more complex people show less punitiveness and racism. Journal of Research in Personality, 42, 1074-1081. doi: 10. 1016/j. jrp. 2007. 11. 002.
50. Williams, J. E., & Best, D. L. (1982). Measuring sex stereotypes. Beverly Hills: Sage.
51. Wilson, M. S., & Liu, J. H. (2003). Social dominance orientation and gender: The moderating role of gender identity. British Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 187-198. doi: 10. 1348/014466603322127175.
52. Zakrisson, I. (2008). Gender differences in social dominance orientation: Gender invariance may be situation invariance. Sex Roles, 59, 254-263. doi: 10. 1007/s11199-008-9445-z.