Prejudice toward Islamic fundamentalists: The role of social domination orientation and interreligious empathy among Christian students in Surabaya
4
Citation
26
Reference
10
Related Paper
Citation Trend
Abstract:
Interreligious conflicts can change the state system regarding religious tolerance and the emergence of terrorist behavior. In Surabaya, terrorism incidents have occurred in three Christian churches, and the alleged perpetrators are the Islamic fundamentalist group JAD. These incidents have fueled feelings of threat and fear of death, which can lead to prejudice. This research aimed to determine the role of social dominance orientation and interreligious empathy as predictors of prejudice toward Islamic fundamentalists. It used a quantitative design with a sample of 400 Christian students aged 17-24 in Surabaya. Furthermore, SDO-7, BES-A, and the Prejudice toward Islamic Fundamentalists Scales were adopted. The results showed that social dominance orientation and interreligious empathy predicted the prejudice toward Islamic fundamentalists (R=0.056; R2=0,061; F(2, 378)=12.876; p<0.001) using multiple linear regression tests. Social dominance orientation did not significantly predict prejudice (t= -0.91426; p=0.361), unlike interreligious empathy (t=4.365; p<0.001). Therefore, intergroup relations need to consider interreligious empathy in reducing prejudice.Keywords:
Prejudice (legal term)
Social dominance orientation
Religious Orientation
Dominance (genetics)
Structural equation modeling on questionnaire data showed that different kinds of prejudice (concerning sexual orientation, ethnicity, gender, and impaired development) can be represented as a general prejudice factor. Specific variability related to classical and modern prejudice only increased model fit marginally. Several causal models of the relation between key individual difference variables and prejudice were tested. Social dominance orientation had a strong, empathy a moderate, and social desirability a comparably weaker direct effect on generalized prejudice. The effects of participant gender on the generalized prejudice factor, where the men scored higher, were almost completely mediated by empathy. The importance of empathy in causal models of prejudice, and of indirect measurement of prejudice, is discussed. (Less)
Prejudice (legal term)
Social dominance orientation
Dominance (genetics)
Cite
Citations (4)
Politically conservative (versus liberal) individuals generally report more prejudice towards various low–status out–groups. Three studies examined whether prejudice suppression factors—specifically, internal and external motivation to suppress (IMS and EMS, respectively) prejudice—can help explain the relationship between political orientation and prejudice. Study 1 showed that IMS and EMS partially mediated the relationship between political orientation and affective prejudice towards Arabs. Study 2 demonstrated that when justification [right–wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation] and suppression (IMS and EMS) factors are simultaneously tested as mediators, only RWA partially mediated the relationship between political orientation and prejudice towards deviant (e.g. gay men) out–groups, whereas RWA and IMS fully mediated the relationship between political orientation and prejudice towards derogated out–groups (e.g. Blacks). Intriguingly, IMS rendered social dominance orientation effects non–significant for derogated out–groups. Study 3 showed that anticipating an out–group interaction (with a Black or lesbian confederate) diminished the mediational contribution of IMS in the political orientation–prejudice relationship because of increased IMS among participants; yet the increases in IMS did not completely eliminate differences in prejudice as a function of political orientation. Ultimately, these three studies demonstrate that suppression (in addition to justification) factors do help explain the relationship between political orientation and prejudice. Copyright © 2013 European Association of Personality Psychology.
Social dominance orientation
Prejudice (legal term)
Dominance (genetics)
Cite
Citations (24)
Abstract Prejudice and bias-motivated aggression (BMA) are pervasive social problems. Scholars have tested numerous competing theoretical models to demonstrate the key predicates of prejudice and BMA, including intergroup contact, dual process (i.e., right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation), perceived injustice, peer socialization, and empathy. Yet, studies to date have not empirically examined the comparative strength of these theoretical perspectives to explain the correlates of (a) prejudice and (b) BMA. This study seeks to address this gap. Utilizing a sample of young 1,001 Belgian participants, this study explores the association between key constructs from different theoretical perspectives to better understand prejudice and BMA towards immigrant populations. Findings show that when accounting for all models of prejudice and BMA, the strongest predictors of prejudice emerge from the dual-process model, the empathy model (outgroup empathy), and the quality (not frequency) of intergroup contact. Yet, prejudice and exposure to peer outgroup hostility are the strongest predictors of BMA. We discuss the implications of our findings and suggest that drawing on criminological theories of prejudice and BMA can be integrated to provide a more nuanced understanding of the nature of prejudice and BMA than what is currently known. We conclude by highlighting some directions for future research on prejudice and BMA.
Prejudice (legal term)
Social dominance orientation
Outgroup
Hostility
Ingroups and outgroups
Cite
Citations (2)
This article discusses the role of lay perceptions of ethnic prejudice in the maintenance and perpetuation of prejudicial attitudes. We first discuss the importance of lay beliefs about ethnic prejudice for understanding processes underlying prejudice and its reduction. We also discuss the potential relations between two individual differences—social dominance orientation and right‐wing authoritarianism—and these beliefs. Next, we describe the research that we have conducted on lay perceptions of ethnic prejudice, including perceptions of causes of prejudice, solutions to prejudice, and the inevitability and justifiability of prejudice. This research demonstrates that individuals who are high in social dominance orientation and, to a lesser extent, right‐wing authoritarianism, hold beliefs which may serve to maintain and perpetuate prejudicial attitudes. We conclude by discussing the implications of these findings for developing effective intervention strategies.
Social dominance orientation
Prejudice (legal term)
Dominance (genetics)
Cite
Citations (51)
Prejudice (legal term)
Social dominance orientation
Flemish
Dominance (genetics)
Contact hypothesis
Cite
Citations (184)
This study is a meta-analysis of publications of the relationship of right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) to racial/ethnic prejudice. In addition to examining the relationship between RWA and prejudice, two control/comparison analyses were conducted. The first looks at the relationship between RWA and attitudes toward homosexuality over the same time period as the racial prejudice analysis. An additional set of control analyses involved social dominance orientation (SDO). The hypothesis was that the relationship between RWA and racial/ethnic prejudice has decreased over time but that the relationships between RWA and anti-gay prejudice and the relationship between SDO and racial/ethnic prejudice and SDO and anti-gay prejudice will be relatively stable over time. The results showed as time passed there was a negative relationship between RWA and racial/ethnic prejudice, a positive relationship with RWA and anti-gay prejudice, a non significant correlation with SDO and racial/ethnic prejudice, and a negative relationship between SDO and anti-gay prejudice.
Prejudice (legal term)
Social dominance orientation
Cite
Citations (0)
Intergroup contact reduces prejudice against a variety of social outgroups and seems to be particularly effective at reducing prejudice in individuals most prone to it—those high in right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO). The present study examines the moderating roles of RWA and SDO in the contact-prejudice relationship, targeting dissident, dangerous, and derogated outgroups: lesbians and gay men, people with schizophrenia, and Indigenous Australians, respectively. In total, 234 participants self-reported contact and prejudice against these outgroups and completed RWA and SDO scales. Contact predicted less prejudice against lesbians and gay men and Indigenous Australians in participants high in RWA and participants high in SDO. However, contact only predicted less prejudice against people with schizophrenia in participants low in RWA or SDO. The results suggest that the ability for intergroup contact to reduce prejudice in prejudice-prone individuals may depend on the outgroup targeted, specifically the threat they pose and the level of prejudice held against them.
Prejudice (legal term)
Social dominance orientation
Ingroups and outgroups
Outgroup
Contact hypothesis
Cite
Citations (21)
Interreligious conflicts can change the state system regarding religious tolerance and the emergence of terrorist behavior. In Surabaya, terrorism incidents have occurred in three Christian churches, and the alleged perpetrators are the Islamic fundamentalist group JAD. These incidents have fueled feelings of threat and fear of death, which can lead to prejudice. This research aimed to determine the role of social dominance orientation and interreligious empathy as predictors of prejudice toward Islamic fundamentalists. It used a quantitative design with a sample of 400 Christian students aged 17-24 in Surabaya. Furthermore, SDO-7, BES-A, and the Prejudice toward Islamic Fundamentalists Scales were adopted. The results showed that social dominance orientation and interreligious empathy predicted the prejudice toward Islamic fundamentalists (R=0.056; R2=0,061; F(2, 378)=12.876; p<0.001) using multiple linear regression tests. Social dominance orientation did not significantly predict prejudice (t= -0.91426; p=0.361), unlike interreligious empathy (t=4.365; p<0.001). Therefore, intergroup relations need to consider interreligious empathy in reducing prejudice.
Prejudice (legal term)
Social dominance orientation
Religious Orientation
Dominance (genetics)
Cite
Citations (4)
Prejudice (legal term)
Social dominance orientation
Dominance (genetics)
Ignorance
Cite
Citations (21)
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 © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Social dominance orientation
Prejudice (legal term)
Outgroup
Ingroups and outgroups
Dominance (genetics)
Cite
Citations (268)