Incorporating status bias into prejudice research

Is prejudice against social groups rooted in intergroup distinctions or in the groups' low status? Whereas much research has focused on the former idea, this dissertation examines the latter. This form of prejudice is of particular concern as it puts members of disadvantaged groups at further disadvantage through prejudice and discrimination targeted against them. To consider this form of prejudice, I propose incorporating status bias, the tendency to prefer high-status groups over low-status groups, into prejudice research. Building on Social Dominance Theory, I conceptualize status bias as rooted in objective group status, consistent with the idea that it reinforces actual group-based inequalities. Throughout seven empirical studies using various study designs and methods, this dissertation examines status bias and its contributions to two major issues in prejudice research: the ideological foundations of prejudice and its reduction through intergroup contact. The results demonstrate that status bias forms group evaluations jointly with other biases and varies in its strength across evaluations of different kinds of target groups. Moreover, distinguishing between status bias and ingroup bias is promising for the study of the ideological foundations of prejudice, particularly SDO and RWA. Both ideologies were previously thought to motivate ingroup bias; however, this research did not differentiate it from status bias. The results reveal that SDO was not associated with stronger ingroup bias; instead, it was associated with stronger status bias, suggesting that incorporating the distinction between the biases into research on the ideological foundations of prejudice is a promising approach. Furthermore, distinguishing between status bias and ingroup bias can improve the assessment of the effectiveness of interventions to reduce prejudice. As such, intergroup contact was associated with weaker ingroup bias but stronger status bias. This pattern has previously been unobserved due to the lack of distinction between biases. Together, the findings demonstrate the merit of incorporating status bias into different fields of prejudice research.

Publication Details

Journal
Media (https://www.suub.uni-bremen.de/)
Published
2025-04-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.26092/elib/3835
Primary Topic
Social Power and Status Dynamics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Incorporating status bias into prejudice research

Media (https://www.suub.uni-bremen.de/)
Social Power and Status Dynamics
article

Incorporating status bias into prejudice research

article en

Abstract

Is prejudice against social groups rooted in intergroup distinctions or in the groups' low status? Whereas much research has focused on the former idea, this dissertation examines the latter. This form of prejudice is of particular concern as it puts members of disadvantaged groups at further disadvantage through prejudice and discrimination targeted against them. To consider this form of prejudice, I propose incorporating status bias, the tendency to prefer high-status groups over low-status groups, into prejudice research. Building on Social Dominance Theory, I conceptualize status bias as rooted in objective group status, consistent with the idea that it reinforces actual group-based inequalities. Throughout seven empirical studies using various study designs and methods, this dissertation examines status bias and its contributions to two major issues in prejudice research: the ideological foundations of prejudice and its reduction through intergroup contact. The results demonstrate that status bias forms group evaluations jointly with other biases and varies in its strength across evaluations of different kinds of target groups. Moreover, distinguishing between status bias and ingroup bias is promising for the study of the ideological foundations of prejudice, particularly SDO and RWA. Both ideologies were previously thought to motivate ingroup bias; however, this research did not differentiate it from status bias. The results reveal that SDO was not associated with stronger ingroup bias; instead, it was associated with stronger status bias, suggesting that incorporating the distinction between the biases into research on the ideological foundations of prejudice is a promising approach. Furthermore, distinguishing between status bias and ingroup bias can improve the assessment of the effectiveness of interventions to reduce prejudice. As such, intergroup contact was associated with weaker ingroup bias but stronger status bias. This pattern has previously been unobserved due to the lack of distinction between biases. Together, the findings demonstrate the merit of incorporating status bias into different fields of prejudice research.

Media (https://www.suub.uni-bremen.de/)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 45%
Social Power and Status Dynamics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.