Differential correlates of dominance scales1

Butt, Dorcas Susan; Fiske, Donald W.

doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1969.tb01754.x

Cited by 13 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In early adolescence, aggressive individuals continue to be less popular than their peers and accordingly are rated as less likeable (Cairns, Cairns, Neckerman, Gest, & Gariepy, 1988;Olweus, 1993; but see Farmer & Rodkin, 1996). From a personality perspective, similar characteristics in adults (i.e., controlling, hostile, and aggressive; Cattell, Saunders, & Stice, 1957) are negatively related to likability (Butt & Fiske, 1969;Sadalla, Kenrick, & Vershure, 1987). These findings indicate that aggressive-coercive tendencies are tolerated less and less as children mature.…”

Section: The Loss Of Prestige Over Timementioning

confidence: 93%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Ontogenesis of Social Dominance: A Strategy-Based Evolutionary Perspective

Hawley

1999

Developmental Review

668

764

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social dominance results when members of a social group vary in their ability to acquire resources in the presence of others (i.e., compete). Traditional approaches to social dominance often emphasize coercive behavior, but nonetheless suggest that dominant individuals are socially central (e.g., watched, attractive social partners). These patterns, however, apply to humans only up to a certain age. This apparent discontinuity may give the false impression that social dominance is less relevant to human social organization than it is to animal social organization. This paper reintroduces the ethological concept of social dominance, but reinterprets it from a strategy-based perspective. That is, if social dominance is defined as differential ability to control resources-without reference to how this is done-then children evidently employ different strategies to compete with peers (e.g., coercive and prosocial). Furthermore, the type of strategy children employ and peers' responses to it depend largely on the ages of the children. By adopting a strategy-based approach to social dominance and explicitly incorporating developmental processes and uniquely human capacities, human social dominance patterns appear to be more similar to primate patterns than commonly believed. Implications for social competence, peer relationships, and the development of the self are discussed. © 1999 Academic PressSurvival, growth, and development oblige resource acquisition (Ricklefs, 1979), and resource acquisition compels competition (Darwin, 1859). The role that this principle plays in the lives of nonhuman species is virtually unquestioned. The issue is less clear for humans, however, largely because competition ranges from the trivial (e.g., the last chocolate donut) to the crucial (e.g., the last liter of potable water) and because humans claim to hold equity in high esteem. Yet for any species, individuals are not all equally able to procure the necessities (or niceties) of life. The natural asymmetries

show abstract

Section: The Loss Of Prestige Over Timementioning

confidence: 93%

“…Not surprisingly, these two diverging types of dominance have opposite relationships with likability (Butt & Fiske, 1969;Sadalla et al, 1987). Summary.…”

Section: Differentiationmentioning

confidence: 94%

The Ontogenesis of Social Dominance: A Strategy-Based Evolutionary Perspective

Hawley

1999

Developmental Review

668

764

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Researchers have recently presented data which support the methodological and theoretical advantages of breaking molar constructs into more precisely defined and measurable parts for personality research (Butt & Fiske, 1968, 1969. A promising method for dividing molar traits is through factor analytical techniques which the authors called the Factorial Facet approach.…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

A Factorial Facet Analysis of Gough's Socialization Scale

Butt¹

1973

soc behav pers

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The disposition toward dominance, one frequently assessed in personality research (Butt & Fiske, 1968;1969), is selected for scrutiny.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our aim is to contribute to this exploration by joining recent formulations of personal disposition to cognitive studies of natural categories. The disposition toward dominance, one frequently assessed in personality research (Butt & Fiske, 1968;1969), is selected for scrutiny.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The frequency concept of disposition: dominance and prototypically dominant acts1

1980

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three studies of dominance explore the frequency concept of disposition, which entails categories of acts that are topographically dissimilar but nonetheless considered to be manifestations of a common disposition. In the first study, 100 difierent acts presumably belonging to the category of dominance were generated through a nomination procedure. In the second study, expert and student panels rated how prototypically dominant each act is, defined in terms of centrality of membership in the category of dominant acts. In this manner, an internal structure of the act category was specified such that some acts are more prototypically dominant while others are more peripheral members. Substantial agreement in these ratings exists within and between panels. The third study found that a multipleact criterion based on prototypically dominant acts is predicted by personality scales with significantly greater success than are multiple-act criteria based on more peripheral acts within the dominance domain. Discussion focuses on specifying the appropriate act category for other frequency dispositions and follow-up field studies of them. Implications for altemative notions of disposition (e.g., purposive-cognitive concepts) are considered.At the heart of personality research lies the concept of disposition: the tendency of individuals to behave in certain ways, for example, to be self-praising, to be subservient in relation to others, or to adopt a sensation-seeking orientation toward the environment. The diverse meanings of this basic concept of personality are pres-1.

show abstract

Differential correlates of dominance scales1

Cited by 13 publications

References 7 publications

The Ontogenesis of Social Dominance: A Strategy-Based Evolutionary Perspective

The Ontogenesis of Social Dominance: A Strategy-Based Evolutionary Perspective

A Factorial Facet Analysis of Gough's Socialization Scale

The frequency concept of disposition: dominance and prototypically dominant acts1

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About