Abstract
Introduction. Status relationships and status perceptions are the main driving forces for behavior, self-perception, and the individual picture of the world. This empirical study aims to investigate the relationship between moral outrage over corruption among Russians and their attitudes toward social dominance. In addition, the social dominance orientation (SDO) scale was approved and validated. Methods. A total of 509 subjects participated in an online survey (mean age 41.34 years, SD = 10.67; 57.6 % males, 42.4 % females). The study used the Social Dominance Orientation scale, the 5-point scale to measure awareness of corruption (General Social Survey), the 4-point scale to measure outrage over corruption, and the Short Dark Triad questionnaire. The data were processed with the SPSS 19.0 software. Results. The results of the study showed a positive relationship between the degree of moral outrage over corruption and the approval of the social hierarchy among Russians. The exploratory factor analysis of the data from the Social Dominance Orientation scale made it possible to distinguish the following three factors: (a) “the idea of social equality (anti-egalitarianism)”, (b) “the idea of social dominance (egalitarianism)”, and (c) “the idea of rivalry (competition)”. The correlation analysis showed significant correlations between personality traits of respondents (the parameters of the dark triad) and their attitudes toward social dominance. Discussion. The findings of this study are confirmed by the results of previous studies on the impact of social dominance orientation on the low level of awareness of corruption, which in turn contributes to the desire to maintain the social hierarchy and strengthens corrupt intention. Furthermore, according to the results of foreign studies, psychological predictors for corrupt intention are competitive world beliefs and dangerous world beliefs. This requires additional verification and is the objective of our future research.
References
Беркович, М. И., Духанина, Л. Н., Максименко, А. А., & Надуткина, И. Э. (2019). Восприятие коррупции как социально-экономического феномена населением региона: структурный аспект. Экономические и социальные перемены: факты, тенденции, прогноз, 2, 161–178. https://doi.org/10.15838/esc.2019.2.62.10
Гулевич, О. А., Агадуллина, Е. Р., & Хухлаев, О. Е. (2018). Одобрение групповой иерархии: русскоязычная версия шкалы для измерения ориентации на социальное доминирование. Психология. Журнал Высшей школы экономики, 15(3), 407–426. https://doi.org/10.17323/1813-8918-2018-3-407-426
Духанина, Л. Н., Дейнека, О. С., Крылова, Д. В., & Максименко, А. А. (2020). Представления о коррупции в системе высшего образования у выпускников ведущих российских вузов. Высшее образование в России, 29(7), 64–74. https://doi.org/l0.31992/0869-3617-2020-29-7-64-74
Егорова, М. С., Ситникова, М. А., & Паршикова, О. В. (2015). Адаптация короткого опросника Темной триады. Психологические исследования, 8(43). https://doi.org/10.54359/ps.v8i43.1052
Журавлев, А. Л., & Юревич, А. В. (2012). Психологические факторы коррупции. Прикладная юридическая психология, 1, 8–21.
Крылова, Д. В., & Максименко, А. А. (2021). Использование искусственного интеллекта в вопросах выявления и противодействия коррупции: обзор международного опыта. Государственное управление: электронный вестник, 84, 241–255. https://doi.org/10.24412/2070-1381-2021-84-241-255
Крылова, Д. В., & Максименко, А. А. (2022). Есть ли у российского коррупционера совесть? Особенности принятия этических решений российскими государственными служащими. Мониторинг общественного мнения: Экономические и социальные перемены, 3, 230–253. https://doi.org/10.14515/monitoring.2022.3.2076
Максименко, А. А., Дейнека, О. С., Крылова, Д. В., & Духанина, Л. Н. (2020). Отношение россиян к коррупции. Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Серия 12. Социология, 13(4), 407–428. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu12.2020.404
Clarke, E. J. R., Klas, A., & Dyos, E. (2021). The role of ideological attitudes in responses to COVID-19 threat and government restrictions in Australia. Personality and Individual Differences, 175, 110734. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.110734
Davis, J. A., & Smith, T. W. (1991). General social surveys, 1972–1991: Cumulative codebook. National Opinion Research Center.
Fleischmann A., & Lammers J. (2020). Power and moral thinking. Current Opinion in Psychology. 33. 23-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2019.06.008
Guimond, S., Dambrun, M., Michinov, N., & Duarte, S. (2003). Does social dominance generate prejudice? Integrating individual and contextual determinants of intergroup cognitions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(4), 697–721. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.697
Gino, F., & Ariely, D. (2012). The dark side of creativity: original thinkers can be more dishonest. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(3), 445–459. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026406
Gino, F., & Wiltermuth, S. S. (2014). Evil genius? How dishonesty can lead to greater creativity. Psychological Science, 25(4), 973–981. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614520714
Huang, L.-L., & Liu, J. H. (2005). Personality and social structural implications of the situational priming of social dominance orientation. Personality and Individual Differences, 38(2), 267–276.
Jost, J., & Hunyady, O. (2003). The psychology of system justification and the palliative function of ideology. European review of social psychology, 13(1), 111–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463280240000046
Kennedy, J.A., & Kray, L. J. (2022). Gender similarities and differences in dishonesty. Current Opinion in Psychology, 48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2022.101461
Kugler, M. B., Cooper, J., & Nosek, B. A. (2010). Group-based dominance and opposition to equality correspond to different psychological motives. Social Justice Research, 23(2–3), 117–155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-010-0112-5
Lalot, F., Jauch, M., & Abrams, D. (2022). Look past the divide: Social dominance, authoritarianism, future thinking, and superordinate identity underlie the political divide on environmental issues. Current Research in Ecological and Social Psychology, 3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cresp.2022.100062
Li, S., Triandis, H. C., & Yu, Y. (2006). Cultural orientation and corruption. Ethics and Behavior, 16(3), 199–215. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327019eb1603_2
Licciardello, O., Castiglione, C., Rampullo, A., & Scolla, V. (2014). Social dominance orientation, cross-group friendship and prejudice towards homosexuals. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 4988–4992. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.1060
Mesler, R. M., Simpson, B., Chernishenko, J., Jain, Sh., Dunn, L. H., & White, K. (2022). Identity salience moderates the effect of social dominance orientation on COVID-19 ‘rule bending’. Acta Psychologica, 223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2021.103460
Modesto, J. G., & Pilati, R. (2020). “Why are the corrupt, corrupt?”: The multilevel analytical model of corruption. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 23. https://doi.org/10.1017/SJP.2020.5
Nicol, A. A., & Rounding, K. (2013). Alienation and empathy as mediators of the relation between Social Dominance Orientation, Right-Wing Authoritarianism and expressions of racism and sexism. Personality and Individual Differences, 55, 294–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.03.009
Paulhus, D. L., & Williams, K. M. (2002). The Dark Triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism and psychopathy. Journal of Research in Personality, 36(6), 556–563. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(02)00505-6
Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L. M., & Malle, B. F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(4), 741–763. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.4.741
Rosenblatt, V. (2012). Hierarchies, power inequalities, and organizational corruption. Journal of Business Ethics. 111(2), 237–251. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1204-y
Shi, J., Chen, Zh., Wang, X., Teng, F., Yang, Y., & Chen, H. (2021). Dominate others, hurt self: Social dominance orientation predicts depression during the COVID-19 pandemic. Personality and Individual Differences, 175. 110710. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.110710
Shu, L. L, & Gino, F. (2012). Sweeping dishonesty under the rug: how unethical actions lead to forgetting of moral rules. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(6), 1164–1177. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028381
Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1993). The dynamics of social dominance and the inevitability of oppression. In P. Sniderman & P. E. Tetlock (Eds.), Prejudice, politics, and race in America today (pp. 173-211). Stanford University Press.
Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. Cambridge University Press.
Stupnianek, K., & Navickas, V. (2019). Can Beliefs in Justice Predict Corrupt Behavior? Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 7(1), 246–259. https://doi.org/10.5964/jspp.v7i1.1031
Tan, X., Liu, L., Zheng, W., Huang, Z. (2015). Effects of social dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism on corrupt intention: The role of moral outrage. International Journal of Psychology, 51(3), 213–219. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12148
Tan X., Liu L., Huang Z., Zhao X., & Zheng W. (2016). The dampening effect of social dominance orientation on awareness of corruption: Moral outrage as a mediator. Social Indicators Research, 125(1), 89–102. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-014-0838-9
Tan, X., Liu, L., Huang, Z., Zheng, W., & Liang, Y. (2016b). The Effects of General System Justification on Corruption Perception and Intent. Frontiers in Psychology, 26(7). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01107
Tan, X., Liu, L., Huang, Zh., & Zheng, W. (2016c). Working for the Hierarchical System: The Role of Meritocratic Ideology in the Endorsement of Corruption. Political psychology, 38(3), 469–479. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12341
Van Hiel, A., & Kossowska, M. (2006). Having few positive emotions, or too many negative feelings? Emotions as moderating variables of authoritarianism effects on racism. Personality and Individual Differences, 40(5), 919–930. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2005.09.014
Vincent, L. C., Emich, K. J., & Goncalo, J. A. (2013). Stretching the moral gray zone: positive affect, moral disengagement, and dishonesty. Psychological Science, 24(4), 595–599. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612458806
Vilanova, F., Milfont, T. L., & Costa, A. B. (2022). A dual process social psychological model of corrupt intention and attitudes toward corrupt people. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 123(4), 854–883. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000414
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2023 Aleksandr A. Maksimenko, Dina V. Krylova, Ol'ga S. Deyneka