Social dominance orientation connects prejudicial human–human and human–animal relations

Abstract

Recent theorizing suggests that biases toward human outgroups may be related to biases toward (non-human) animals, and that individual differences in desire for group dominance and inequality may underlie associations between these biases. The present investigation directly tests these assumptions. As expected, the results of the current study (N = 191) demonstrate that endorsing speciesist attitudes is significantly and positively associated with negative attitudes toward ethnic outgroups. Importantly, individual differences in social dominance orientation accounted for the association between speciesist and ethnic outgroup attitudes; that is, these variables are associated due to their common association with social dominance orientation that underpins these biases. We conclude that social dominance orientation represents a critical individual difference variable underlying ideological belief systems and attitudes pertaining to both human-human intergroup and human-animal relations.

Citizen Attitudes to Farm Animals in Finland: A Population-Based Study

“…Research indicates that attitudes to animals are connected to human-welfare, human-equality and out-group-tolerance attitudes (Deemer and Lobao 2011;Dhont et al 2014;Paul 2000). This research gives evidence for this link as those who value social equality (in terms of gender equality, the rights of sexual minorities and general social justice) express greater concern for agricultural animals across all variables included in this study.…”

“…Moreover, their study suggests that concern for farm animal welfare coincides with greater concern for human welfare, as indicated by the valuing of humane labor conditions and fair trade. Psychological studies indicate that prejudicial attitudes toward human out-groups are connected to negative attitudes toward nonhuman animals (Dhont et al 2014). Hence, it seems that people who value egalitarian relations among humans tend also to value more egalitarian relations between humans and nonhuman animals, suggesting that other-oriented concerns are not restricted by species-boundaries.…”

The person-based nature of prejudice: Individual difference predictors of intergroup negativity

“…Thus, prejudicial attitudes towards human outgroups are systematically connected to prejudicial attitudes towards non-human outgroups, influenced by both individual differences and contextual manipulations of the human-animal divide. Moreover, in a Canadian sample of university students (n = 191), those endorsing more speciesist attitudes (e.g., "The production of inexpensive meat, eggs, and dairy products justifies maintaining animals under crowded conditions") also reported more negative ethnic outgroup attitudes (Dhont, Hodson, Costello, & MacInnis, 2014), with ideological individual differences in desire for dominance and inequality (SDO) accounting for (i.e., THE PERSON-BASED NATURE OF PREJUDICE 23 explaining) the association between speciesism and negative ethnic outgroup attitudes. That is, individual differences in SDO, a key factor in understanding human-human relations, also underpin human-animal relations.…”

Social dominance orientation and climate change denial: The role of dominance and system justification

“…Correspondingly, it is possible that the SDO-denial relation reflects a motivation to maintain prevailing hierarchical social structures, which could change if more focus is placed on climate change mitigation. Importantly, however, recent research suggests that individuals expressing high SDO also tend to support group-based dominance in human-nature relations (Dhont, Hodson, Costello, & MacInnis, 2014;Milfont et al, 2013). This suggests that these individuals consider humans to be a superior group holding a legitimate right to dominate the rest of the ecosystem.…”