Dominance motivated delusions: Whites with high social dominance orientation perceive equal amounts of institutional racism between Blacks and Whites

IF 4 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL

Group Processes & Intergroup Relations Pub Date : 2022-06-23 DOI:10.1177/13684302221103984

Christopher K. Marshburn, Brandon A. Reinkensmeyer, E. Knowles

{"title":"Dominance motivated delusions: Whites with high social dominance orientation perceive equal amounts of institutional racism between Blacks and Whites","authors":"Christopher K. Marshburn, Brandon A. Reinkensmeyer, E. Knowles","doi":"10.1177/13684302221103984","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Whites display an asymmetry when detecting discrimination—disparate treatment from high-status groups directed toward low-status groups constitutes discrimination but not the opposite. Whites also believe they experience just as much racial discrimination as Blacks. This latter pattern could be especially true for Whites with higher social dominance orientation (SDO)—preference for intergroup dominance and inequality. Three studies (including one pilot study) investigated whether Whites with higher (vs. lower) SDO perceived examples of institutional and individual instances of racial discrimination as evidence of racism when happening to White (vs. Black) victims. Results revealed partial support for our prediction that the asymmetry in discrimination detection for Whites with higher (vs. lower) SDO would be opposite to the previously identified asymmetry, especially for examples of institutional (vs. individual) discrimination. Implications are discussed in the context of the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests and 2021 Capitol siege.","PeriodicalId":48099,"journal":{"name":"Group Processes & Intergroup Relations","volume":"26 1","pages":"1244 - 1270"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Group Processes & Intergroup Relations","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302221103984","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 2

Abstract

Whites display an asymmetry when detecting discrimination—disparate treatment from high-status groups directed toward low-status groups constitutes discrimination but not the opposite. Whites also believe they experience just as much racial discrimination as Blacks. This latter pattern could be especially true for Whites with higher social dominance orientation (SDO)—preference for intergroup dominance and inequality. Three studies (including one pilot study) investigated whether Whites with higher (vs. lower) SDO perceived examples of institutional and individual instances of racial discrimination as evidence of racism when happening to White (vs. Black) victims. Results revealed partial support for our prediction that the asymmetry in discrimination detection for Whites with higher (vs. lower) SDO would be opposite to the previously identified asymmetry, especially for examples of institutional (vs. individual) discrimination. Implications are discussed in the context of the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests and 2021 Capitol siege.

查看原文本刊更多论文

支配性错觉:具有高度社会支配倾向的白人认为黑人和白人之间的制度性种族主义是等量的

白人在察觉歧视时表现出一种不对称——高地位群体对低地位群体的差别待遇构成歧视，而不是相反。白人还认为，他们遭受的种族歧视和黑人一样多。后一种模式尤其适用于具有较高社会支配倾向(SDO)的白人——偏好群体间支配和不平等。三项研究(包括一项试点研究)调查了当发生在白人(与黑人)受害者身上时，具有较高(与较低)SDO的白人是否将机构和个人种族歧视的例子视为种族主义的证据。结果部分支持了我们的预测，即高(低)SDO的白人在歧视检测中的不对称性与之前发现的不对称性相反，特别是对于机构(与个人)歧视的例子。在2020年“黑人的命也重要”抗议活动和2021年国会大厦围困的背景下，讨论了其影响。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Group Processes & Intergroup Relations PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL-

CiteScore

8.50

自引率

4.50%

发文量

期刊介绍： Group Processes & Intergroup Relations is a scientific social psychology journal dedicated to research on social psychological processes within and between groups. It provides a forum for and is aimed at researchers and students in social psychology and related disciples (e.g., organizational and management sciences, political science, sociology, language and communication, cross cultural psychology, international relations) that have a scientific interest in the social psychology of human groups. The journal has an extensive editorial team that includes many if not most of the leading scholars in social psychology of group processes and intergroup relations from around the world.