Social Dominance Model

There were some limitations caused by omitting extraneous variables in the current research that must be taken into account. To begin with, a confounding variable that may have affected the results in the present study was social dominance orientation. Social dominance orientation is defined as an orientation accentuating hierarchical structures, and supporting individuals to outcast members of lower class out-groups as competition (Pratto, Sidanius, Stallworth, & Malle, 1994). Both RWA and social dominance orientation are encompassed by Duckitt’s (2001) dual process motivational model, which states that both social-psychological constructs are major predictors of prejudice. Specifically, this theory states that social dominance orientation
Research conducted by Christopher and Wojda (2008) has shown that individuals with high levels of RWA demonstrate more benevolent sexism in the workplace. They found that those with right wing conservative beliefs significantly predicted for benevolent sexism, which is defined as a subtle form of sexism based on traditional role preference (Glicke & Fiske, 1996). Along with the fact that the current study’s results confirm the positive association between RWA and sexism, it is logical to state that individuals with greater RWA levels would endorse gender inequality. Likewise, a study conducted by Baker, Wendt, and Slonaker (2002) discovered that women only earned 87.5% compared to their male colleagues in labor employment. Women are at a disadvantage in the workplace compared to men and this sexist treatment may correlate with this specific social psychological orientation. Therefore, those who are right-wing authoritarian must be cautious of exhibiting and promoting sexist behaviour. Although, as no causation was found between both, further research is required to determine the root of sexism, how to decrease prejudice behaviour, as well as close the wage
A study conducted by Glicke, Sakalli-Ugurli, Ferreira, and Aguiar de Souza (2002) found that both hostile and benevolent sexism were positively correlated with attitudes that legitimize abuse in Turkey and Brazil. As previously stated, ambivalent sexism, which encompasses both benevolent sexism and hostile sexism have been sufficiently proven in the psychological measure for modern sexism (Glicke & Fiske, 2001). In relation to the current study’s results, greater levels of abusive behaviour were associated with increased sexism towards women, which is subsequently correlated with higher levels of RWA as the present study revealed. Hence, this implies that increased levels of RWA are indirectly correlated with abusive behaviour through sexist beliefs towards