東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

Social identity or social dominance?

Redmond, Brian F.

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Social identity or social dominance?

Record Type:	Language materials, printed : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Social identity or social dominance?/
Author:	Redmond, Brian F.
Description:	130 p.
Notes:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 72-05, Section: B, page: .
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International72-05B.
Subject:	Psychology, Social. -
Online resource:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3444341
ISBN:	9781124518145

Social identity or social dominance?
Redmond, Brian F.

Social identity or social dominance? - 130 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 72-05, Section: B, page: .

Thesis (Ph.D.)--City University of New York, 2011.

Social identity theory (SIT; Tajfel & Turner, 1979) and social dominance theory (SDT; Sidanius & Pratto, 1999) have emerged as two of the leading theories used to predict individual behavior in group settings. Under many circumstances they make similar predictions; however there seem to be certain situations (for example, individual versus intergroup threat) in which each theory makes a different prediction. This research aimed to examine that difference and provide evidence as to which theory is more accurate in predicting human behavior under those circumstances. The underlying hypothesis of this research was that because social dominance orientation (SDO) is presumably a stable personality attribute (Pratto, Sidanius, & Levin, 2006; Pratto, Sidanius, Stallworth, & Malle, 1994; Sidanius & Pratto, 1999), under varying threat conditions one's SDO should remain stable as predicted by SDT. If SIT was a better explanatory mechanism on the other hand, then SDO would be more variable under those different threat situations as SIT suggests behaviors are more situational in nature. Other outcomes were also measured (personal identity, social identity, and protectiveness of the group) to examine differences between the predictive power of each theory. Findings indicate that SDT is a better explanatory mechanism for behavior choice particularly under threat conditions when a group is considered low status. Results of this study are discussed with caveats and strengths.

ISBN: 9781124518145Subjects--Topical Terms:

529430
Psychology, Social.

Social identity or social dominance?
LDR:02612nam 2200337 4500 001 1402309
005 20111028110432.5
008 130515s2011 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781124518145
035 $a (UMI)AAI3444341
035 $a AAI3444341
040 $a UMI $c UMI
100 1 $a Redmond, Brian F. $3 1681480
245 1 0 $a Social identity or social dominance?
300 $a 130 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 72-05, Section: B, page: .
500 $a Adviser: Joel Lefkowitz.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--City University of New York, 2011.
520 $a Social identity theory (SIT; Tajfel & Turner, 1979) and social dominance theory (SDT; Sidanius & Pratto, 1999) have emerged as two of the leading theories used to predict individual behavior in group settings. Under many circumstances they make similar predictions; however there seem to be certain situations (for example, individual versus intergroup threat) in which each theory makes a different prediction. This research aimed to examine that difference and provide evidence as to which theory is more accurate in predicting human behavior under those circumstances. The underlying hypothesis of this research was that because social dominance orientation (SDO) is presumably a stable personality attribute (Pratto, Sidanius, & Levin, 2006; Pratto, Sidanius, Stallworth, & Malle, 1994; Sidanius & Pratto, 1999), under varying threat conditions one's SDO should remain stable as predicted by SDT. If SIT was a better explanatory mechanism on the other hand, then SDO would be more variable under those different threat situations as SIT suggests behaviors are more situational in nature. Other outcomes were also measured (personal identity, social identity, and protectiveness of the group) to examine differences between the predictive power of each theory. Findings indicate that SDT is a better explanatory mechanism for behavior choice particularly under threat conditions when a group is considered low status. Results of this study are discussed with caveats and strengths.
520 $a Keywords: social identity, social dominance, threat, status
590 $a School code: 0046.
650 4 $a Psychology, Social. $3 529430
650 4 $a Psychology, General. $3 1018034
690 $a 0451
690 $a 0621
710 2 $a City University of New York. $b Psychology. $3 1025517
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 72-05B.
790 1 0 $a Lefkowitz, Joel, $e advisor
790 1 0 $a Markus, Keith $e committee member
790 1 0 $a Good, Catherine $e committee member
790 1 0 $a Cohen-Charash, Yochi $e committee member
790 1 0 $a Goldstein, Harold $e committee member
790 $a 0046
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2011
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3444341