Is “Reverse Racism” Justified? Examining Prejudice and Social Dominance Orientation

Abstract/Description/Artist Statement

Social dominance orientation describes individual differences in the tendency to endorse existing social hierarchies. Individuals higher in social dominance orientation often express greater acceptance of homophobia, racism, sexism, and other forms of bigotry. Generally, people are more likely to attribute social conflict between groups to prejudice if that conflict is “prototypical” in nature (i.e., a lower-power victim and higher-power perpetrators). However, those high in social dominance orientation may be more likely to blame victims of discrimination for their treatment. Therefore, the current study aimed to investigate whether social dominance orientation disrupts perceptions of “prototypical” social conflict between groups. We predicted that people higher, compared to lower, in social dominance orientation would be less likely to attribute “prototypical” conflict to racial prejudice. Participants read one of three stories depicting social ostracism. This ostracism was described as prototypical of racism (Black victim, White perpetrators), atypical of racism (White victim, Black perpetrators), or, in the control condition, did not mention racial identity. Results show that prototypical racial conflict was attributed to racial prejudice more than the atypical or control conflict. However, while this association held for individuals at lower or average levels, individuals with higher levels of social dominance orientation reported no difference in prejudice attributions between prototypical and atypical racial conflict. This suggests that social dominance orientation may lead people to perceive little to no differences in racism based on whether an interaction is prototypical. This could then become a barrier towards providing support for historical victims of racial prejudice.

Presenting Author Name/s

Jaye I. Brayboy

Faculty Advisor/Mentor

Matthew Espinosa, Ph.D.

Faculty Advisor/Mentor Email

maespino@odu.edu

Faculty Advisor/Mentor Department

Psychology

College/School Affiliation

College of Sciences

Student Level Group

Undergraduate

Presentation Type

Poster

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS
 

Is “Reverse Racism” Justified? Examining Prejudice and Social Dominance Orientation

Social dominance orientation describes individual differences in the tendency to endorse existing social hierarchies. Individuals higher in social dominance orientation often express greater acceptance of homophobia, racism, sexism, and other forms of bigotry. Generally, people are more likely to attribute social conflict between groups to prejudice if that conflict is “prototypical” in nature (i.e., a lower-power victim and higher-power perpetrators). However, those high in social dominance orientation may be more likely to blame victims of discrimination for their treatment. Therefore, the current study aimed to investigate whether social dominance orientation disrupts perceptions of “prototypical” social conflict between groups. We predicted that people higher, compared to lower, in social dominance orientation would be less likely to attribute “prototypical” conflict to racial prejudice. Participants read one of three stories depicting social ostracism. This ostracism was described as prototypical of racism (Black victim, White perpetrators), atypical of racism (White victim, Black perpetrators), or, in the control condition, did not mention racial identity. Results show that prototypical racial conflict was attributed to racial prejudice more than the atypical or control conflict. However, while this association held for individuals at lower or average levels, individuals with higher levels of social dominance orientation reported no difference in prejudice attributions between prototypical and atypical racial conflict. This suggests that social dominance orientation may lead people to perceive little to no differences in racism based on whether an interaction is prototypical. This could then become a barrier towards providing support for historical victims of racial prejudice.