Individual Differences Perspective (individual + difference_perspective)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Selected Abstracts

Social Dominance Orientation: Testing a Global Individual Difference Perspective

Chris G. Sibley
There has been considerable debate regarding whether Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) constitutes a global individual difference that predicts prejudice or is instead a product of self-categorization processes. Two studies addressed this issue by contrasting the predictive and discriminant validity of SDO and reworded SDO items assessing prescriptive attitudes toward inequality and dominance based on specific stratifications. Consistent with a global individual difference perspective, SDO predicted systematic between-person consistencies in attitudes toward inequality based on specific group-based stratifications. Moreover, SDO and specific stratification attitudes exerted reciprocal cross-lagged effects on one another over five months (Study 1, N = 252). These results indicate that SDO is partially derived from specific attitudes and experiences (a bottom-up effect), but once formed, SDO exerts a reciprocal (top-down) effect on specific attitudes and cognitions about group-based dominance across a range of stratifications. Cross-sectional analyses indicated that SDO also predicted generalized prejudice toward ethnic groups after controlling for ethnic stratification attitudes (Study 2, N = 138). Taken together, these results indicate that SDO reflects a global motivation to achieve group-based dominance that is partially determined by situational factors but not reducible to self-categorization processes associated with attitudes towards specific social groups or categories. [source]

Examining dispositional and situational effects on outgroup attitudes,

Joke Meeus
Two research lines have dominated the quest for the antecedents of outgroup attitudes. Whereas the first has viewed outgroup attitudes as a result of individual differences, the second stressed the importance of the intergroup situation. In order to investigate the interplay of individual differences and situational characteristics, key predictors of the individual differences perspective (i.e. right-wing authoritarianism or RWA, and social dominance orientation or SDO) and the intergroup relations perspective (i.e. ingroup identification and ingroup threat) were simultaneously tested. Two studies revealed additive but no interaction effects of RWA and SDO, ingroup identification and threat. Additionally, Study 1 showed that threat effects remain limited to the outgroup that is portrayed as threatening and do not generalize to other outgroups. Copyright 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source]

Individual differences in the experience of burden in caring for relatives with dementia: role of personality and mastery

Edward Helmes
Objective:,We explored individual differences in caregiver outcome according to the personality and behavioural style of the carer. Current models of caregiver burden fail to consider such factors. Methods:,This cross-sectional, exploratory study used carer variables of personality traits and mastery and patient variables of cognitive, functional and neurobehavioural status to predict scores on an established measure of burden in a sample of 51 people with dementia and their carers. Results:,Hierarchical multiple regression showed a significant association between behavioural disturbance and neuroticism and burden, but not with mastery. Conclusions:,The primary findings in this study are that models of caregiver outcome need to take an individual differences perspective in accounting for caregiver mental health risk factors: personality characteristics do play a part in the way caregivers manage this difficult role. [source]

Development of Mutual Responsiveness Between Parents and Their Young Children

Grazyna Kochanska
This comprehensive study of mutual responsiveness examined 102 mothers and 102 fathers interacting with their children at 7 and 15 months. Responsiveness was studied from developmental and individual differences perspectives, and assessed using macroscopic ratings and microscopic event coding. The latter captured parents' reactions to children's negative, positive, and physical bids, and children's reactions to parents' social-interactive bids, mood regulation attempts, and influence attempts. Responsiveness depended on bid type and child age, and reflected developmental changes in children, parents, and relationships. Mothers were more responsive than fathers; children were equally responsive to both parents and coherent in their responsiveness. Ratings revealed dyadic mutuality and longitudinal continuity of responsiveness. Parent,child responsiveness from 7 to 15 months was consistent with assumptions of a parent-driven process. [source]