Contrasting Theoretical Approaches to Intergroup Relations

By L. Huddy. 2004

119 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b8b5b90673f5c61d9434b6d392aabf9eb97a88c4

How researchers see this paper

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

In Social Psychology

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Social Identity, System Justification, and Social Dominance: Commentary on Reicher, Jost et al., and Sidanius et al. (2004, background): “Again, however, if the primary explanatory power of SDO depends on its conception as a stable individual disposition toward intergroup hierarchies, then social dominance theory will always have difficulty explaining how the same individual or social group can desire to enhance intergroup hierarchies”
We will hunt them down: How social dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism fuel ethnic persecution of immigrants in fundamentally different ways (2008, background): “…of, the general point that the interaction of both individual differences and social context is crucial for understanding intergroup phenomena (e.g., Duckitt, 2003, 2006; Sibley, Wilson, & Duckitt, 2007a, 2007b; Son Hing et al., 2007; Huddy, 2004; Haslam & Reicher, 2007; Postmes & Jetten, 2006).”
Prejudice in Schools: Promotion of an Inclusive Culture and Climate (2010, background): “Theories that explain prejudice range from ethnocentrism to orecticism, competition and social dominance orientation, and authoritarian personality and trait theory (Altemeyer, 1988; Bobo & Hutchings, 1996; Huddy, 2004; Levy, 1999; Miller, 2002; Sidanius & Pratto, 1999; Sue, 2004; YoungBruehl, 1996)”
Social Dominance Theory: Explorations in the Psychology of Oppression (2016, background): “Huddy, L. (2004). Contrasting theoretical approaches to intergroup relations.”
Social Dominance Theory: Its Agenda and Method (2004, unknown): “(e.g., Huddy, 2004; Sniderman, Crosby, & Howell, 2000) ,”
A quarter century of system justification theory: Questions, answers, criticisms, and societal applications (2018, background): “…beliefs and ideologies may be internalized through a passive process of social learning but doubt that people are motivated to engage in system justification (Huddy, 2004; Mitchell & Tetlock, 2009; Owuamalam, Rubin,& Spears, 2018a; Reicher, 2004; Rubin&Hewstone, 2004; Spears, Jetten,&Doosje, 2001).”
Person-Organization Congruence and the Maintenance of Group-Based Social Hierarchy: A Social Dominance Perspective (2005, background): “…to competing and related theoretical perspectives is beyond the scope of this paper, these questions are comprehensively discussed elsewhere (see Huddy, 2004; Jost, Banaji, & Nosek, 2004; Banaji, 2004; Reicher, 2004; Rubin & Hewstone, 2004; and Sidanius, Pratto, van Laar, & Levin, 2004).”
A Decade of System Justification Theory: Accumulated Evidence of Conscious and Unconscious Bolstering of the Status Quo (2004, background): “Jackman (1994), for instance, railed against “conflict theories” of intergroup relations and the conception of prejudice as “irrational antagonism.”