Social power increases implicit prejudice

Guinote, Ana; Willis, Guillermo B.; Martellotta, Cristiana

doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2009.11.012

Cited by 66 publications

(59 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to social dominance theory (Sidanius & Pratto, 1999), holding a dominant social position is conducive to the endorsement of legitimizing ideologies. Several studies have shown that individuals with power expressed a set of hostile attitudes toward the most socially disadvantaged groups in a quasi‐automatic way (Georgesen & Harris, 1998; Goodwin et al., 2000; Guimond et al., 2003; Guinote, Willis, & Martellotta, 2010; Kipnis, 1972; Richeson & Ambady, 2003; Rodriguez‐Baillon et al., 2000; Sidanius & Pratto, 1999). This tendency to justify one's social position by endorsing specific ideologies is observed even after relatively subtle experimental inductions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Power and Legitimizing Ideologies in Hierarchy‐Enhancing vs. Hierarchy‐Attenuating Environments

Oliveira

Guimond

Dambrun

2012

Political Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to social dominance theory, intergroup dynamics are strongly influenced by the social positions which individuals hold in society. Several studies suggest that holding a position of power can, sometimes automatically, generate negative attitudes and hostile behaviors toward subordinate social groups. However, at present, the studies carried out on these effects of power have not taken into account the influence of the normative context. Based on the distinction made by Sidanius and Pratto between “hierarchy‐enhancing” (HE) vs. “hierarchy‐attenuating” (HA) environments, this study examines if the effects of power on legitimizing cognitions vary as a function of the normative environment. A laboratory study and a study conducted in a natural environment confirm our hypothesis that individuals holding a powerful or dominant social role in a HE setting differ significantly from individuals holding an equally powerful role in a HA setting. The effects of power observed in past research probably resulted from studying power in hierarchy‐enhancing environments, but not in hierarchy‐attenuating ones.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Power and Legitimizing Ideologies in Hierarchy‐Enhancing vs. Hierarchy‐Attenuating Environments

Oliveira

Guimond

Dambrun

2012

Political Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Power has been shown to produce aggressive tendencies, including denigration (Georgesen & Harris, 1998, 2006, dominance (Kipnis, 1972;Sidanius & Pratto, 1999), and negative stereotyping (Guinote, Willis, & Martellotta, 2010;Richeson & Ambady, 2003). More recently, researchers have explored moderators of the relationship between power and aggressive tendencies.…”

Section: Power Insecurity and Denigrationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Power, defensive denigration, and the assuaging effect of gratitude expression

Cho

Fast

2012

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Power-holders enhance hierarchies also through developing stereotypes and prejudiced attitudes towards minorities, creating an evaluative distance between them and their subordinates (Guinote, Willis, & Martellotta, 2010;Richeson & Ambady, 2003;Russell & Fiske, 2010). For example, Guinote et al (2010) randomly primed participants with high power, low power, or neutral constructs. Then they measured participants' implicit attitudes using an affective misattribution procedure (Payne, Cheng, Govorun, & Stewart, 2005).…”

Section: Power and Goal Biasesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effects of Social Power on Goal Content and Goal Striving: A Situated Perspective

Willis

Guinote²

2011

Social & Personality Psych

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, we integrate recent findings on the ways power affects goal pursuit. We review literature suggesting that power has two unique effects on goal pursuit: it affects the goals individuals choose to pursue, and the ways they pursue them. In short, we maintain that power‐holders prefer goals that suit their privileged positions – reward oriented and hierarchy‐maintenance goals – as well as goals that come easily to mind because they are chronically accessible or afforded in the situation. We go on to show that powerful individuals exhibit better self‐regulation during goal striving than powerless individuals, independently of goal content. Finally, we review conditions that reverse the effects of power on goal pursuit.

show abstract

Social power increases implicit prejudice

Cited by 66 publications

References 56 publications

Power and Legitimizing Ideologies in Hierarchy‐Enhancing vs. Hierarchy‐Attenuating Environments

Power and Legitimizing Ideologies in Hierarchy‐Enhancing vs. Hierarchy‐Attenuating Environments

Power, defensive denigration, and the assuaging effect of gratitude expression

The Effects of Social Power on Goal Content and Goal Striving: A Situated Perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About