Discrimination: because I want to or because I have to? : a comparison between the explanations of social identity theory and social dominance theory for intergroup prejudice in South Africa

Simple item page
dc.contributor.advisorFinchilescu, Gillianen_ZA
dc.contributor.authorMeyer, Inesen_ZA
dc.date.accessioned2015-12-11T03:39:29Z
dc.date.available2015-12-11T03:39:29Z
dc.date.issued2004en_ZA
dc.descriptionIncludes bibliographical references.en_ZA
dc.description.abstractThis thesis attempts to determine whether the amount of discrimination a person displays is more influenced by stable attitudinal orientations, as implied by the Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) construct of Social Dominance Theory, or by the context variance favoured by Social Identity Theory. To this end, three studies were conducted. The first study was designed to establish whether the standard assessment tool, the SDO6 scale, is an appropriate measure of SDO in South Africa. It was found that the scale possessed the same general characteristics as in other societies, as assessed using a diverse sample of people from the Cape Town metropolitan region. However, the finding that Black females had a higher desire for inequality between groups than Black males, and that younger subjects desired more inequality than older participants, suggests that cultural aspects have to be taken into consideration when interpreting findings obtained with the SDO6 scale. The second and third study employed the scale in order to assess the research question, as stated above. The second study employed an experimental design to determine whether manipulations of group status, stability, and the legitimacy of status differences influences in-group bias in English speaking students from the University of Cape Town. They completed the SDO6 scale before and after being exposed to a contrived theory of coping differences between English and Afrikaans speakers. As the manipulations of stability and legitimacy were unsuccessful only the influence of status and SDO on discrimination could be tested High status group members described themselves their own group as more competent than the group of Afrikaans speakers, and also contributed greater coping ability to English speakers than to Afrikaans speakers. Differences in SDO levels were not reflected in the amount of in-group bias expressed. The third study investigated the influence of SDO, group status, stability and legitimacy on race- based discrimination by analysing survey data collected from a large and diverse sample from the Cape Town metropolitan region. This study differed from previous SOT research, which focused on societies with stable societies, by investigating the applicability of the concept of SDO in a society which has been recognised as undergoing socioeconomic and political change. The results obtained support SOTs assumption that stratification systems are rather persistent to change. Black, Coloured and White participants still see the historically dominant White South African group as dominant and the Black South African group as the most subordinate group. The participants expected this hierarchy to remain stable over the next five years. Black participants were the most in favour of equality between race groups, despite SDT's prediction that the most subordinate group would have the lowest SDO levels. In contrast to the finding in Study 2, a higher SDO level was relate to more favouritism for a person's own group. The effect of SDO was moderated by perceptions of the own group's relative status and the perceived legitimacy of the stratification stem. The socio-structural variables by themselves did not contribute to the explanation of individual differences in discrimination. It is concluded that under some conditions, SITs socio-structural variables are better able to explain why people discriminate and in others the SDT's concept of SDO has more value. In other words, SDO is not as general as posted by social dominance theorists. Further research on the influence of the salience of group distinctions and cultural factors in general on the desire to establish and maintain social hierarchies is required.en_ZA
dc.identifier.apacitationMeyer, I. (2004). <i>Discrimination: because I want to or because I have to? : a comparison between the explanations of social identity theory and social dominance theory for intergroup prejudice in South Africa</i>. (Thesis). University of Cape Town ,Faculty of Humanities ,Department of Psychology. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/11427/15776en_ZA
dc.identifier.chicagocitationMeyer, Ines. <i>"Discrimination: because I want to or because I have to? : a comparison between the explanations of social identity theory and social dominance theory for intergroup prejudice in South Africa."</i> Thesis., University of Cape Town ,Faculty of Humanities ,Department of Psychology, 2004. http://hdl.handle.net/11427/15776en_ZA
dc.identifier.citationMeyer, I. 2004. Discrimination: because I want to or because I have to? : a comparison between the explanations of social identity theory and social dominance theory for intergroup prejudice in South Africa. University of Cape Town.en_ZA
dc.identifier.ris TY - Thesis / Dissertation AU - Meyer, Ines AB - This thesis attempts to determine whether the amount of discrimination a person displays is more influenced by stable attitudinal orientations, as implied by the Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) construct of Social Dominance Theory, or by the context variance favoured by Social Identity Theory. To this end, three studies were conducted. The first study was designed to establish whether the standard assessment tool, the SDO6 scale, is an appropriate measure of SDO in South Africa. It was found that the scale possessed the same general characteristics as in other societies, as assessed using a diverse sample of people from the Cape Town metropolitan region. However, the finding that Black females had a higher desire for inequality between groups than Black males, and that younger subjects desired more inequality than older participants, suggests that cultural aspects have to be taken into consideration when interpreting findings obtained with the SDO6 scale. The second and third study employed the scale in order to assess the research question, as stated above. The second study employed an experimental design to determine whether manipulations of group status, stability, and the legitimacy of status differences influences in-group bias in English speaking students from the University of Cape Town. They completed the SDO6 scale before and after being exposed to a contrived theory of coping differences between English and Afrikaans speakers. As the manipulations of stability and legitimacy were unsuccessful only the influence of status and SDO on discrimination could be tested High status group members described themselves their own group as more competent than the group of Afrikaans speakers, and also contributed greater coping ability to English speakers than to Afrikaans speakers. Differences in SDO levels were not reflected in the amount of in-group bias expressed. The third study investigated the influence of SDO, group status, stability and legitimacy on race- based discrimination by analysing survey data collected from a large and diverse sample from the Cape Town metropolitan region. This study differed from previous SOT research, which focused on societies with stable societies, by investigating the applicability of the concept of SDO in a society which has been recognised as undergoing socioeconomic and political change. The results obtained support SOTs assumption that stratification systems are rather persistent to change. Black, Coloured and White participants still see the historically dominant White South African group as dominant and the Black South African group as the most subordinate group. The participants expected this hierarchy to remain stable over the next five years. Black participants were the most in favour of equality between race groups, despite SDT's prediction that the most subordinate group would have the lowest SDO levels. In contrast to the finding in Study 2, a higher SDO level was relate to more favouritism for a person's own group. The effect of SDO was moderated by perceptions of the own group's relative status and the perceived legitimacy of the stratification stem. The socio-structural variables by themselves did not contribute to the explanation of individual differences in discrimination. It is concluded that under some conditions, SITs socio-structural variables are better able to explain why people discriminate and in others the SDT's concept of SDO has more value. In other words, SDO is not as general as posted by social dominance theorists. Further research on the influence of the salience of group distinctions and cultural factors in general on the desire to establish and maintain social hierarchies is required. DA - 2004 DB - OpenUCT DP - University of Cape Town LK - https://open.uct.ac.za PB - University of Cape Town PY - 2004 T1 - Discrimination: because I want to or because I have to? : a comparison between the explanations of social identity theory and social dominance theory for intergroup prejudice in South Africa TI - Discrimination: because I want to or because I have to? : a comparison between the explanations of social identity theory and social dominance theory for intergroup prejudice in South Africa UR - http://hdl.handle.net/11427/15776 ER - en_ZA
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11427/15776
dc.identifier.vancouvercitationMeyer I. Discrimination: because I want to or because I have to? : a comparison between the explanations of social identity theory and social dominance theory for intergroup prejudice in South Africa. [Thesis]. University of Cape Town ,Faculty of Humanities ,Department of Psychology, 2004 [cited yyyy month dd]. Available from: http://hdl.handle.net/11427/15776en_ZA
dc.language.isoengen_ZA
dc.publisher.departmentDepartment of Psychologyen_ZA
dc.publisher.facultyFaculty of Humanitiesen_ZA
dc.publisher.institutionUniversity of Cape Town
dc.subject.otherPsychologyen_ZA
dc.titleDiscrimination: because I want to or because I have to? : a comparison between the explanations of social identity theory and social dominance theory for intergroup prejudice in South Africaen_ZA
dc.typeDoctoral Thesis
dc.type.qualificationlevelDoctoral
dc.type.qualificationnamePhDen_ZA
uct.type.filetypeText
uct.type.filetypeImage
uct.type.publicationResearchen_ZA
uct.type.resourceThesisen_ZA
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
thesis_hum_2004_meyer_ines.pdf
Size:
17.72 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
Collections
PhD / Doctoral