Catarina L. Carvalho

Online hate speech has profound implications for society, with migrants as primary targets. Underreporting by victims and bystanders obscures the true extent, indirectly legitimizing these crimes. To assess bystander intervention in online hate speech against immigrants, we developed a scale based on the five steps of the bystander intervention model. In Study 1 (N = 294), exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses confirmed the five-factor structure, having, as the final step, different types of actions that bystanders can adhere to when witnessing online hate speech. Structural equation modelling showed that, overall, each step was predicted by the preceding step, as proposed by the bystander intervention model. Study 2 (N = 240) replicated this finding and assessed the scale's criterion-related validity, revealing negative associations with moral disengagement and victim blaming, and positive associations with self-efficacy. We discuss the scale's relevance and applicability in studying bystander behaviour in response to online hate speech.

Understanding why hierarchical social systems thrive and persist has been an important issue for the social sciences. Social dominance orientation (SDO) is considered one of the most important measures to study intergroup attitudes and behavior and how hierarchical social systems are maintained. In this study (N = 313) we assessed the psychometric proprieties of the European-Portuguese version of the SDO7 scale and examined the proposed two-factor solution corresponding to the two SDO subdimensions (SDO-D and SDO-E). Results of the confirmatory factor analysis showed that both the one-factor (full scale) and the two-factor solution model have good indicators of model fit. Nevertheless, results also showed that, although the SDO full scale was positively correlated with all the related constructs (e.g., right-wing authoritarianism, meritocracy), each subdimension correlated with them differently. Thus, considering and examining the two subdimensions separately should allow to understand and predict, with more precision, intergroup attitudes, and behaviors.

Cultural logic is a set of cultural scripts and patterns organized around a central theme. The cultural logics of dignity, honor, and face describe different ways of evaluating a person’s worth and maintaining cooperation. These cultural logics vary in prevalence across cultures. In this study, we collaboratively develop and validate a measure capturing these cultural logics, which will allow us to map world cultures based on the prevalence of these logics. We will further explore the interrelations of dignity, honor, and face with prosocial behavior, values, moral beliefs, and religiosity as well as examine the generalizability of these relationships across cultures. Finally, we will explore historical antecedents (e.g., resource scarcity) and current correlates (e.g., inequality) of the country-level prevalence of these cultural logics. This study will generate a new dataset of country scores for dignity, honor, and face that will be available for future comparative research. It will also provide theoretical insights for researchers and practitioners interested in cooperation and social behavior within and between cultures.

All societies are organized based on hierarchies, where some groups have more power than others. Although some may aspire for a hierarchy-free world, hierarchies are inevitable and strongly resistant to changes. People may feel motivated to see hierarchical social systems as fair, legitimate, and justified, and endorse system-justifying ideologies, such as social dominance orientation (SDO), contributing to the maintenance and perpetuation of intergroup inequality. Belief in the social system’s fairness and legitimacy should increase acceptance and support for the existing society-based social stratification and status hierarchies, weakening support for collective action towards social change. We tested this idea, with two studies, conducted on members of the general population ( N = 121) and on members of a disadvantaged group highly mobilized for social change towards intergroup equality ( N = 154). Results showed that system justification undermines collective action through SDO (full mediation). We discuss the implications of including ideological processes when predicting collective action.

Although different social crises may eventually favor undemocratic and authoritarian forms of governance, at some point, such antidemocratic practices require the support of a significant part of the population to be implemented. The present research investigates how and whether the COVID‐19 pandemic might have favoured greater support for antidemocratic governmental practices, on the premise of regaining control and security. Using data from 17 countries (N = 4364) and national‐level indicators (i.e., real number of contagions and deaths, and sociopolitical indicators), we test how the risk of contagion and death from COVID‐19, along with personal orientations (i.e., social dominance orientation [SDO], right‐wing authoritarianism [RWA], and perceived anomie) motivate authoritarian and antidemocratic practices. Results from multilevel models indicate that risk perception and perceptions of political instability predict a wish for stronger leadership, agreement with martial law, and support for a controlling government especially when SDO and RWA are high, while more egalitarian and less conservative people agree less with these authoritarian measures in spite of the levels of risk perception. We discuss the implications for these findings for future research on similar but also dissimilar external events (natural disasters, war, or terror incidents) and the consequences for societies with higher authoritarian tendencies.

We propose that support for group-based hierarchy among members of low-status or subordinate groups may be boosted by beliefs in future ingroup high status. Specifically, the more individuals believe their group may hold a higher status, the more they support hierarchical intergroup relations (i.e., high social dominance orientation; SDO), by boosting ingroup favouritism. In turn, SDO should be positively associated with collective action tendencies by increasing social competition intentions. Using samples from Catalonia (N = 152) and the Basque Country (N = 262), results showed that independence supporters’ beliefs in future ingroup status enhancement reinforced participants’ SDO, through nationalist sentiments (i.e., ingroup bias) but not through patriotism in the Catalan sample, and directly in the Basque sample. In turn, SDO increased collective actions towards independence by reinforcing individuals’ motivation to compete with the opponent dominant outgroup (Madrid region), especially in the Catalan sample. We discuss the implications of considering situational and contextual factors to better understand individuals’ support for group-based hierarchies and inequality.

La actual pandemia de la COVID-19 ha supuesto un marcado incremento de las brechas sociales preexistentes. En esta investigación analizamos las relaciones de diferentes facetas de clase social con el bienestar y afectividad general a lo largo de un total de 8 países de la región cultural iberoamericana. Asimismo, también pusimos a prueba el potencial rol mediador del riesgo percibido relativo a la COVID-19 y la eficacia colectiva percibida. Los resultados obtenidos (a) revelaron que una clase social más baja se relacionó con un menor bienestar y afecto positivo, y un mayor afecto negativo; (b) confirmaron que la clase social subjetiva constituye un mejor predictor del bienestar y afectividad general que la clase social objetiva (i.e., nivel educativo); y (c) mostraron que los efectos de la clase social subjetiva en el bienestar/afectividad general se daban de forma indirecta a través del riesgo percibido y la eficacia colectiva. Estos hallazgos confirman la existencia de diferencias en bienestar y afectividad general en función de la clase social durante la pandemia, al tiempo que permiten avanzar en la comprensión de los mecanismos psicosociales subyacentes.

We propose that low-status group members' support for group-based hierarchy and inequality (i.e., social dominance orientation; SDO) may represent an ideological strategy to guarantee the legitimacy of future ingroup status-enhancement. Specifically, we argue that, under unstable social structure conditions, SDO serves as an ideological justification for collective action tendencies aimed at competing for a higher status. In such context, SDO should be positively related with actions aimed to favor the ingroup (i.e., collective actions) by increasing group members' motivation to engage in direct competition with a relevant higher-status outgroup. We conducted two studies under highly competitive and unstable social structure contexts using real life groups. In Study 1 (N = 77), we induced Low vs. High Ingroup (University) Status and in Study 2 (N = 220) we used competing sports groups. Overall, results showed that, among members of low-status groups, SDO consistently increased individuals' motivation to get involved in actions favoring the ingroup, by boosting their motivation to compete with the opposing high-status outgroup. We discuss the results in light of the social dominance and collective action framework.