Epistemic Uncertainty, Social Dominance Orientation, and Prejudices toward Women in Leadership Roles: Mediation and Moderation Analyses
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. NCC and System Justification Theories
1.2. NCC and Negative Attitudes towards Women Managers
1.3. SDO and Negative Attitudes towards Women Managers
1.4. The Present Research
2. Method
2.1. Sample Size Determination
2.2. Participants, Design, and Procedure
2.3. Measures
3. Results
3.1. Analytical Strategy
3.2. NCC and Negative Attitudes toward Women as Managers: The Mediating Role of SDO
3.3. SDO and Attitudes toward Women as Managers: The Moderating Role of NCC
4. Discussion
5. Limits and Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Aiello, Antonio, Stefano Passini, Alessio Tesi, Davide Morselli, and Felicia Pratto. 2019. Measuring Support for Intergroup Hierarchies: Assessing the Psychometric Proprieties of the Italian Social Dominance Orientation 7 Scale. TPM: Testing, Psychometrics, Methodology in Applied Psychology 26: 373–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Albarello, Flavia, Federico Contu, Conrad Baldner, Michele Vecchione, Arie W. Kruglanski, and Antonio Pierro. 2023a. At the roots of Allport’s “prejudice-prone personality”: The impact of NFC on prejudice towards different outgroups and the mediating role of binding moral foundations. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 97: 101885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Albarello, Flavia, Silvana Mula, Federico Contu, Conrad Baldner, Arie W. Kruglanski, and Antonio Pierro. 2023b. Addressing the effect of concern with COVID-19 threat on prejudice towards immigrants: The sequential mediating role of need for cognitive closure and desire for cultural tightness. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 93: 101755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Asbrock, Frank, Oliver Christ, John Duckitt, and Chris G. Sibley. 2011. Differential Effects of Intergroup Contact for Authoritarians and Social Dominators. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 38: 477–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Austin, Darren E. J., and Mervyin Jackson. 2019. Benevolent and Hostile Sexism Differentially Predicted by Facets of Right-Wing Authoritarianism and Social Dominance Orientation. Personality and Individual Differences 139: 34–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baldner, Conrad, and Antonio Pierro. 2009. The trials of women leaders in the workforce: How a need for cognitive closure can influence acceptance of harmful gender stereotypes. Sex Roles 80: 565–77. [Google Scholar]
- Baldner, Conrad, Antonio Pierro, Daniela Di Santo, and Arie W. Kruglanski. 2022. Men and women who want epistemic certainty are at-risk for hostility towards women leaders. The Journal of Social Psychology 162: 549–65. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Bhatnagar, Deepti, and Ranjini Swamy. 1995. Attitudes toward women as managers: Does interaction make a difference? Human Relations 48: 1285–307. [Google Scholar]
- Carton, Andrew M., and Ashleigh S. Rosette. 2011. Explaining bias against black leaders: Integrating theory on information processing and goal-based stereotyping. Academy of Management Journal 54: 1141–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Christopher, Andrew N., and Mark R. Wojda. 2008. Social Dominance Orientation, Right-Wing Authoritarianism, Sexism, and Prejudice toward Women in the Workforce. Psychology of Women Quarterly 32: 65–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Contu, Federico, Alessio Tesi, and Antonio Aiello. 2023a. Intergroup Contact Is Associated with Less Negative Attitude toward Women Managers: The Bolstering Effect of Social Dominance Orientation. Behavioral Sciences 13: 973. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Contu, Federico, Molly Ellenberg, Arie W. Kruglanski, Giuseppe Pantaleo, and Antonio Pierro. 2023b. Need for cognitive closure and desire for cultural tightness mediate the effect of concern about ecological threats on the need for strong leadership. Current Psychology. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cook, Alison, and Christy Glass. 2013. Glass cliffs and organizational saviors: Barriers to minority leadership in work organizations? Social Problems 60: 168–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Keersmaecker, Jonas, and Arne Roets. 2017. All victims are equally innocent, but some are more innocent than others: The role of group membership on victim blaming. Current Psychology 39: 254–62. [Google Scholar]
- Elsesser, Kim M. 2016. Gender bias against female leaders: A review. In Handbook on Well-Being of Working Women. Edited by M. L. Connerley and J. Wu. Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 161–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gelfand, Michele J., and Rebeca Lorente. 2021. Threat, tightness, and the evolutionary appeal of populist leaders. In The Psychology of Populism. London: Routledge, pp. 276–94. [Google Scholar]
- Graham, Jesse, Jonathan Haidt, and Brian A. Nosek. 2009. Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 96: 1029–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Greenwald, Anthony G., T. Andrew Poehlman, Eric L. Uhlmann, and Mahrazin R. Banaji. 2009. Understanding and Using the Implicit Association Test: III. Meta-Analysis of Predictive Validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 97: 17–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hayes, Andrew F. 2022. Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis. New York: The Guilford Press. [Google Scholar]
- Ho, Arnold K., Jim Sidanius, Nour Kteily, Jennifer Sheehy-Skeffington, Felicia Pratto, Kristin E. Henkel, Rob Foels, and Andrew L. Stewart. 2015. The Nature of Social Dominance Orientation: Theorizing and Measuring Preferences for Intergroup Inequality Using the New SDO7 Scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 109: 1003–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Javalgi, Raj R. G., Robert Scherer, Carol Sánchez, Lorena Pradenas Rojas, Victor Parada Daza, Chi-en E. Hwang, and Wu Yan. 2011. A comparative analysis of the attitudes toward women managers in China, Chile, and the USA. International Journal of Emerging Markets 6: 233–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jost, John T., and Orsolya Hunyady. 2005. Antecedents and consequences of system-justifying ideologies. Current Directions in Psychological Science 14: 260–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koenig, Anne M., Alice H. Eagly, Abigail A. Mitchell, and Tiina Ristikari. 2011. Are leader stereotypes masculine? A meta-analysis of three research paradigms. Psychological Bulletin 137: 616–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kruglanski, Arie W. 1990. Lay epistemic theory in social-cognitive psychology. Psychological Inquiry 1: 181–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kruglanski, Arie W. 2004. The Psychology of Closed Mindedness. London: Psychology Press. [Google Scholar]
- Kteily, Nour S., Gordon Hodson, Kristof Dhont, and Arnold K. Ho. 2017. Predisposed to Prejudice but Responsive to Intergroup Contact? Testing the Unique Benefits of Intergroup Contact across Different Types of Individual Differences. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations 22: 3–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, I.-Ching, Felicia Pratto, and Blair T. Johnson. 2011. Intergroup Consensus/Disagreement in Support of Group-Based Hierarchy: An Examination of Socio-Structural and Psycho-Cultural Factors. Psychological Bulletin 137: 1029–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lerner, Melvin J., and Dale T. Miller. 1978. Just world research and the attribution process: Looking back and ahead. Psychological Bulletin 85: 1030–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McDonald, Michael L., Gareth D. Keeves, and James D. Westphal. 2018. One step forward, one step back: White male top manager organizational identification and helping behavior toward other executives following the appointment of a female or racial minority CEO. Academy of Management Journal 61: 405–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peters, Lawrence H. 2000. Women as managers scale. In Handbook of Tests and Measurement in Education and the Social Sciences. New York: Rowman and Littlefield, p. 306. [Google Scholar]
- Pierro, Antonio, and Arie W. Kruglanski. 2005. Revised Need for Cognitive Closure Scale. Rome: Università di Roma La Sapienza. [Google Scholar]
- Pratto, Felicia, Jim Sidanius, and Shana Levin. 2006. Social Dominance Theory and the Dynamics of Intergroup Relations: Taking Stock and Looking Forward. European Review of Social Psychology 17: 271–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pratto, Felicia, Jim Sidanius, Lisa M. Stallworth, and Bertram F. Malle. 1994. Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 67: 741–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roets, Arne, Alain Van Hiel, and Kristopher Dhont. 2012. Is sexism a gender issue? A motivated social cognition perspective on men’s and women’s sexist attitudes toward own and other gender. European Journal of Personality 26: 350–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roets, Arne, and Alain Van Hiel. 2011. Allport’s prejudiced personality today: Need for closure as the motivated cognitive basis of prejudice. Current Directions in Psychological Science 20: 349–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roets, Arne, Arie W. Kruglanski, Margorzata Kossowska, Antonio Pierro, and Ying-yi Y. Hong. 2015. The motivated gatekeeper of our minds: New directions in need for closure theory and research. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 52: 221–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rosette, Ashleigh S., and Robert W. Livingston. 2012. Failure is not an option for Black women: Effects of organizational performance on leaders with single versus dual-subordinate identities. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 48: 1162–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schoemann, Alexander M., Aron J. Boulton, and Stephen D. Short. 2017. Determining power and sample size for simple and complex mediation models. Social Psychological and Personality Science 8: 379–86. [Google Scholar]
- Sibley, Chris G., Marc S. Wilson, and John Duckitt. 2007. Antecedents of Men’s Hostile and Benevolent Sexism: The Dual Roles of Social Dominance Orientation and Right-Wing Authoritarianism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 33: 160–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sidanius, Jim, and Felicia Pratto. 1999. Social Dominance: An Intergroup Theory of Social Hierarchy and Oppression. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Tesi, Alessio, Antonio Aiello, Davide Morselli, Enrichetta Giannetti, Antonio Pierro, and Felicia Pratto. 2019. Which people are willing to maintain their subordinated position? Social dominance orientation as antecedent to compliance to harsh power tactics in a higher education setting. Personality and Individual Differences 151: 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tesi, Alessio, Felicia Pratto, Antonio Pierro, and Antonio Aiello. 2020. Group Dominance in Hierarchy-Attenuating and Hierarchy-Enhancing Organizations: The Role of Social Dominance Orientation, Need for Cognitive Closure, and Power Tactics in a Person–Environment (Mis)Fit Perspective. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice 24: 102–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- van der Toorn, Jojanneke, and John Jost. 2014. Twenty years of system justification theory: Introduction to the special issue on BIdeology and system justification processes. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations 17: 413–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Viola, Marta, Conrad Baldner, and Antonio Pierro. 2023. How and when need for cognitive closure impacts attitudes towards women managers (Cómo y cuándo la necesidad de cierre influye en las actitudes hacia las mujeres directivas). International Journal of Social Psychology 38: 157–91. [Google Scholar]
NCC | SDO | Prej | EDU | Age | Gender | Politic | M (SD) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NCC | (0.73) | 3.47 (0.66) | ||||||
SDO | 0.120 * | (0.89) | 1.24 (0.90) | |||||
Prej | 0.080 | 0.227 *** | — | −0.52 (1.38) | ||||
EDU | −0.105 * | −0.041 | −0.062 | — | — | |||
Age | 0.052 | −0.025 | −0.103 * | 0.023 | — | 32.71 (10.29) | ||
Gender | 0.083 | −0.192 *** | −0.254 *** | 0.105 * | −0.060 | — | — | |
Politic | 0.040 | 0.397 *** | 0.190 *** | −0.200 *** | 0.107 * | −0.192 *** | — | 3.23 (1.51) |
95% Confidence Intervals | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Dep | Pred | b | SE | Lower | Upper | t | p |
SDO | Gender | −0.254 | 0.085 | −0.421 | −0.087 | −2.994 | 0.003 |
SDO | Age | −0.007 | 0.004 | −0.015 | 0.007 | −1.791 | 0.074 |
SDO | EDU | 0.103 | 0.073 | −0.040 | 0.247 | 1.415 | 0.158 |
SDO | Politic | 0.231 | 0.028 | 0.175 | 0.287 | 8.11 | 0.001 |
Prej | Gender | −0.615 | 0.137 | −0.883 | −0.346 | −4.502 | 0.001 |
Prej | Age | −0.017 | 0.006 | −0.030 | −0.004 | −2.661 | 0.008 |
Prej | EDU | 0.001 | 0.116 | −0.229 | 0.229 | 0.002 | 0.999 |
Prej | Politic | 0.097 | 0.049 | 0.001 | 0.193 | 1.978 | 0.049 |
95% Confidence Intervals | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Dep | Pred | b | SE | Lower | Upper | t | p |
Prej | NCC | 0.208 | 0.103 | 0.006 | 0.409 | 2.025 | 0.044 |
Prej | SDO | 0.166 | 0.082 | 0.005 | 0.326 | 2.023 | 0.044 |
Prej | SDO × NCC | 0.260 | 0.116 | 0.006 | 0.490 | 2.235 | 0.026 |
Prej | Politic | 0.101 | 0.049 | 0.005 | 0.197 | 2.079 | 0.038 |
Prej | Gender | −0.592 | 0.136 | −0.860 | −0.324 | −4.347 | 0.001 |
Prej | Age | −0.018 | 0.006 | −0.031 | −0.005 | −2.787 | 0.006 |
Prej | EDU | 0.003 | 0.116 | −0.225 | 0.231 | 0.029 | 0.976 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Contu, F.; Aiello, A.; Pierro, A. Epistemic Uncertainty, Social Dominance Orientation, and Prejudices toward Women in Leadership Roles: Mediation and Moderation Analyses. Soc. Sci. 2024, 13, 54. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci13010054
Contu F, Aiello A, Pierro A. Epistemic Uncertainty, Social Dominance Orientation, and Prejudices toward Women in Leadership Roles: Mediation and Moderation Analyses. Social Sciences. 2024; 13(1):54. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci13010054
Chicago/Turabian StyleContu, Federico, Antonio Aiello, and Antonio Pierro. 2024. "Epistemic Uncertainty, Social Dominance Orientation, and Prejudices toward Women in Leadership Roles: Mediation and Moderation Analyses" Social Sciences 13, no. 1: 54. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci13010054