Blog
About

9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Antecedents and consequences of autonomy- and dependency-oriented help toward refugees

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 19

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Book Chapter: not found

          Self-Perception Theory

           Daryl J. Bem (1972)
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Yet another dark side of chivalry: Benevolent sexism undermines and hostile sexism motivates collective action for social change.

            The current research tests a model for understanding how benevolent sexism undermines, whereas hostile sexism promotes, social change. Study 1 (N = 99) and Study 2 (N = 92) demonstrate that exposing women to benevolent sexism decreases their engagement in collective action, whereas exposure to hostile sexism increases it. Both effects were mediated by gender-specific system justification and perceived advantages of being a woman. In Study 2, positive and negative affect also mediated these relationships. Results from Studies 3 and 4 (N = 68 and N = 37) support the causal chain described in the mediational models tested in Studies 1 and 2. Manipulations that increased gender-specific system justification (Study 3) and perceived advantages of being a woman (Study 4) reduced intentions to participate in collective action. PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The nature of social dominance orientation: Theorizing and measuring preferences for intergroup inequality using the new SDO₇ scale.

              A new conceptualization and measurement of social dominance orientation-individual differences in the preference for group based hierarchy and inequality-is introduced. In contrast to previous measures of social dominance orientation that were designed to be unidimensional, the new measure (SDO7) embeds theoretically grounded subdimensions of SDO-SDO-Dominance (SDO-D) and SDO-Egalitarianism (SDO-E). SDO-D constitutes a preference for systems of group-based dominance in which high status groups forcefully oppress lower status groups. SDO-E constitutes a preference for systems of group-based inequality that are maintained by an interrelated network of subtle hierarchy-enhancing ideologies and social policies. Confirmatory factor and criterion validity analyses confirmed that SDO-D and SDO-E are theoretically distinct and dissociate in terms of the intergroup outcomes they best predict. For the first time, distinct personality and individual difference bases of SDO-D and SDO-E are outlined. We clarify the construct validity of SDO by strictly assessing a preference for dominance hierarchies in general, removing a possible confound relating to support for hierarchy benefitting the ingroup. Consistent with this, results show that among members of a disadvantaged ethnic minority group (African Americans), endorsement of SDO7 is inversely related to ingroup identity. We further demonstrate these effects using nationally representative samples of U.S. Blacks and Whites, documenting the generalizability of these findings. Finally, we introduce and validate a brief 4-item measure of each dimension. This article importantly extends our theoretical understanding of one of the most generative constructs in social psychology, and introduces powerful new tools for its measurement.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                European Journal of Social Psychology
                Eur. J. Soc. Psychol.
                Wiley
                00462772
                November 28 2018
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Psychology; University of Osnabrück; Osnabrück Germany
                [2 ]Department of Psychology; FernUniversität in Hagen; Hagen Germany
                [3 ]Department of Psychology; Oxford University; Oxford UK
                Article
                10.1002/ejsp.2554
                © 2018

                Comments

                Comment on this article