The effects of realistic threat and group identification on social dominance orientation

142 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

An experimental approach to Intergroup Threat Theory: Manipulations, moderators, and consequences of realistic vs. symbolic threat (2018, methodology): “For instance, as a “model minority” stereotyped as highachieving and competitive (Maddux, Galinsky, Cuddy, & Polifroni, 2008; Morrison & Ybarra, 2008), Asian Americans are often considered a source of realistic threat amongWhite Americans.”
Group status, perceptions of threat, and support for social inequality (2009, background): “Intergroup threats can also affect more direct expressions of support for social inequality (i.e., SDO), though perceptions of status have not yet been assessed in this context (Morrison & Ybarra, 2008).”
Status boundary enforcement and the categorization of black–white biracials (2013, methodology): “Because the items of this measure constituted our manipulation of threat, we were not interested in responses to these items (Morrison & Ybarra, 2008).”
Changing the ideological roots of prejudice: Longitudinal effects of ethnic intergroup contact on social dominance orientation (2014, background): “…shown, for instance, that SDO is enhanced with higher levels of societal resource scarcity and competition, or when membership of dominant social groups is made salient (Guimond, Dambrun, Michinov, & Duarte, 2003; Huang & Liu, 2005; Morrison & Ybarra, 2008; Schmitt, Branscombe, & Kappen, 2003).”