If they can’t change, why support change? Implicit theories about groups, social dominance orientation and political identity

Abstract

In three studies across three cultures (U.S., Sweden, and Israel), we examine whether implicit theories about groups are associated with political identity and whether this relationship is mediated by Social Dominance Orientation (SDO). Study 1 found that raising the salience of entity beliefs leads to increased right-wing political self-identification on social issues, although no such effect was found regarding general or economic political identity. In Study 2, we found that the more participants endorsed entity beliefs about groups (vs. incremental beliefs about groups), the more they identified as political rightists (vs. leftists) in the U.S., Sweden, and Israel. SDO mediated this relationship in the U.S. and Swedish samples, but not in the Israeli sample -a political setting in which political identity is largely determined by attitudes regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Study 3 showed that SDO mediated the relationship between implicit theories about groups and Israelis' political identity regarding social/economic issues, but did not have such a mediating role with respect to political identity regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.Keywords: implicit theories about groups, group malleability, political identity, political ideology, social dominance orientation, political psychology SammanfattningVi undersökte, i tre olika kulturer (USA, Sverige och Israel), om implicita teorier om grupper är relaterade till politisk orientering och om denna relation medieras av social dominans (SDO). Resultaten från Studie 1 visade att tendensen till politisk högerorientering kring sociala frågor ökade som ett resultat av att entitetsteorier om grupper (att grupper inte kan förändras) gjordes mer tillgängliga. Ökad tillgänglighet till entitetsteorier om grupper hade dock ingen effekt på generell politisk orientering eller politisk orientering angående ekonomiska frågor. Studie 2 visade att ju mer deltagarna stödde entitetsteorier jämfört med inkrementellteorier om grupper (att grupper kan förändras), desto mer identifierade de sig själva som politisk höger (jämfört med vänster) i USA, Sverige och Israel. Social dominans medierade denna relation i USA och Sverige, men inte i Israel. Det senare landet har en politisk kontext där politisk orientering till stor del handlar om attityder gällande Israel-Palestina-konflikten. Studie 3 visade att social dominans medierade relationen mellan implicita teorier om grupper och Israelers politiska orientering gällande sociala/ekonomiska frågor, men att social dominans inte hade en sådan medierande effekt när det gällde politisk orientering angående Israel-Palestina-konflikten. Teoretiska och praktiska implikationer av forskningen diskuteras.

Reducing Negative Attitudes Toward Immigrants in Russia and Taiwan: Possible Beneficial Effects of Naïve Dialecticism and an Incremental Worldview

“…The two mechanisms driven by RWA and SDO on attitudes toward immigrants are largely similar in Russia and Taiwan. The findings are in direct contrast with those of McFarland et al (1996) and Kahn et al (2018). Perhaps culturally similar findings could be observed only when the constructs were culturally equivalent [e.g., our adoption of culturally equivalent constructs in comparison to Kahn et al (2018) who did not test for culturally equivalent scales].…”

“…The findings are in direct contrast with those of McFarland et al (1996) and Kahn et al (2018). Perhaps culturally similar findings could be observed only when the constructs were culturally equivalent [e.g., our adoption of culturally equivalent constructs in comparison to Kahn et al (2018) who did not test for culturally equivalent scales]. As for the divergent findings with McFarland et al (1996), there are two potential explanations for this difference.…”

“…The inclusion of the two non-western societies further allows us to test whether naïve dialecticism and entity vs. incremental theorists may be linked with authoritarian beliefs and attitudes toward immigrants. Based on the findings that people in Taiwan and Russia generally understand and support naïve dialecticism more than Americans or Western Europeans (e.g., Chinese, Peng and Nisbett, 1999 ; Russians, Varnum et al, 2008 ), we tested mixed findings in Kahn et al (2018) . Kahn et al (2018) tested how incremental vs. entity theories, RWA, and SDO may predict one’s political identity (liberal vs. conservative) in the United States, Sweden, and Israel.…”

“…Based on the findings that people in Taiwan and Russia generally understand and support naïve dialecticism more than Americans or Western Europeans (e.g., Chinese, Peng and Nisbett, 1999 ; Russians, Varnum et al, 2008 ), we tested mixed findings in Kahn et al (2018) . Kahn et al (2018) tested how incremental vs. entity theories, RWA, and SDO may predict one’s political identity (liberal vs. conservative) in the United States, Sweden, and Israel. They found that the more one endorses the entity view of groups, the more one endorses SDO and as a result supports a conservative political identity in the United States and Sweden.…”

Towards a new framework of personalized psychological interventions to improve intergroup relations and promote peace

“…The core of malleability beliefs is flexibility and the capacity for growth and change. These beliefs fit better with left‐wing ideology than with right‐wing, as left‐wingers believe in and strive towards change, whereas right‐wingers favor stability (Kahn et al, ). What core appraisals does the malleability intervention address, and which intergroup emotions are these appraisals associated with?…”