Asymmetries in responses to group-based relative deprivation: The moderating effects of group status on endorsement of right-wing ideology

Feelings of group-based relative deprivation (GRD) motivate collective responses to defend the ingroup. As such, there may be status-based asymmetries in the associations GRD has with ideologies that perpetuate inequality-namely, right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO). Study 1 examined this hypothesis using a national sample of adults (N = 41,007) and revealed that the correlations GRD had with RWA and SDO were positive among members of a high-status group but negative among members of low-status groups. Study 2 examined these associations longitudinally (N = 22,083) across eight annual assessments. Although a traditional cross-lagged panel analysis identified status-based asymmetries in the longitudinal associations between our variables of interest, analyses partitioning between-person stability from within-person change found no evidence that GRD leads to differences in RWA or SDO (or vice versa). The theoretical and practical implications of these results are discussed.

Automated summary

Feelings of group-based relative deprivation (GRD) can lead to collective action to protect the ingroup. High-status groups show positive correlations between GRD and right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO), while low-status groups show negative correlations. Longitudinal analysis shows that GRD does not lead to differences in RWA or SDO, and vice versa. The theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.