Antecedents of Men’s Hostile and Benevolent Sexism: The Dual Roles of Social Dominance Orientation and Right-Wing Authoritarianism

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.

Abstract

The authors argue that individual differences in men's Benevolent Sexism (BS) stem from a threat-driven security-cohesion motivation, indexed by Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA), whereas Hostile Sexism (HS) stems from a competitively driven motivation for intergroup dominance, indexed by Social Dominance Orientation (SDO). In Study 1, meta-analysis indicated that men's SDO (controlling for RWA) was moderately positively associated with HS (r = .35) but not BS (r = .05), whereas men's RWA (controlling for SDO) was moderately associated with BS (r = .36) but only weakly associated with HS (r = .16). Study 2 replicated and extended these results by also modeling the dual personality traits and world-views underlying HS and BS. In Study 3, longitudinal analyses demonstrated that SDO predicted increases in HS (but not BS) and RWA predicted increases in BS (but not HS) throughout a 5-month period. Relations between the sociostructural and individual difference bases of men's ambivalent sexism are discussed.

Related collections

Most cited references 15

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism.

Peter Glick, Susan Fiske (1996)

0 comments Cited 867 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Exposure to benevolent sexism and complementary gender stereotypes: consequences for specific and diffuse forms of system justification.

John T. Jost, Aaron C. Kay (2005)

Many have suggested that complementary gender stereotypes of men as agentic (but not communal) and women as communal (but not agentic) serve to increase system justification, but direct experimental support has been lacking. The authors exposed people to specific types of gender-related beliefs and subsequently asked them to complete measures of gender-specific or diffuse system justification. In Studies 1 and 2, activating (a) communal or complementary (communal + agentic) gender stereotypes or (b) benevolent or complementary (benevolent + hostile) sexist items increased support for the status quo among women. In Study 3, activating stereotypes of men as agentic also increased system justification among men and women, but only when women's characteristics were associated with higher status. Results suggest that complementary stereotypes psychologically offset the one-sided advantage of any single group and contribute to an image of society in which everyone benefits through a balanced dispersion of benefits. ((c) 2005 APA, all rights reserved).

0 comments Cited 248 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

The psychological bases of ideology and prejudice: testing a dual process model.

John Duckitt, Claire Wagner, Ilouize du Plessis … (2002)

The issue of personality and prejudice has been largely investigated in terms of authoritarianism and social dominance orientation. However, these seem more appropriately conceptualized as ideological attitudes than as personality dimensions. The authors describe a causal model linking dual dimensions of personality, social world view, ideological attitudes, and intergroup attitudes. Structural equation modeling with data from American and White Afrikaner students supported the model, suggesting that social conformity and belief in a dangerous world influence authoritarian attitudes, whereas toughmindedness and belief in a competitive jungle world influence social dominance attitudes, and these two ideological attitude dimensions influence intergroup attitudes. The model implies that dual motivational and cognitive processes, which may be activated by different kinds of situational and intergroup dynamics, may underlie 2 distinct dimensions of prejudice.