A Politico-Psychological Analysis of Social Dominance Orientation

Report generated

February 13, 2026

1 Study Characteristics

1.1 Items: Social Dominance Orientation

The following facets form the construct Social Dominance Orientation (SDO): - Dominance - Antiegalitarianism

Item Statement
Dominance1 [SDO7_1] Some groups of people must be kept in their place
Dominance2 [SDO7_2] It’s probably a good thing that certain groups are at the top and other groups are at the bottom
Dominance3 [SDO7_3] An ideal society requires some groups to be on top and others to be on the bottom
Dominance4 [SDO7_4] Some groups of people are simply inferior to other groups
Dominance5 [SDO7_5_REV] [REV] Groups at the bottom are just as deserving as groups at the top
Dominance6 [SDO7_6_REV] [REV] No one group should dominate in society
Dominance7 [SDO7_7_REV] [REV] Groups at the bottom should not have to stay in their place
Dominance8 [SDO7_8_REV] [REV] Group dominance is a poor principle
AntiEgalitarianism1 [SDO7_9] We should not push for group equality
AntiEgalitarianism2 [SDO7_10] We shouldn’t try to guarantee that every group has the same quality of life
AntiEgalitarianism3 [SDO7_11] It is unjust to try to make groups equal
AntiEgalitarianism4 [SDO7_12] Group equality should not be our primary goal
AntiEgalitarianism5 [SDO7_14_REV] [REV] We should work to give all groups an equal chance to succeed
AntiEgalitarianism6 [SDO7_15_REV] [REV] We should do what we can to equalize conditions for different groups
AntiEgalitarianism7 [SDO7_16_REV] [REV] No matter how much effort it takes, we ought to strive to ensure that all groups have the same chance in life
AntiEgalitarianism8 [SDO7_17_REV] [REV] Group equality should be our ideal

1.2 Samples 2016

N=1500

To conduct a exploratory and a confirmatory large surveys during the general election, we hired a professional survey firm (SSI, a US-based market research company that recruits participants from a panel of 7,139,027 American citizens; more information can be found at www.surveysampling.com (now https://www.dynata.com/) to recruit a nationally representative sample of 1,500 Americans (50.7% women) who completed study materials during the general election from August 16-September 9, 2016. (Information about sampling and exclusion criteria is included in the Supplement). The age distribution was as follows: 18-24 (12.9%), 25-34 (17.6%), 35-44 (17.5%), 45-54 (19.5%), 55-65 (15.6%) and older than 65 (16.9%). The ethnic breakdown was: White/European American (82.5%), Black/African American (7.7%), Latino (5.9%) and “Other” (4.0%). Concerning religion, 67.6% identified as Christian, 17.1% as religiously affiliated but not Christian, and 15.3% as Atheist/Agnostic. With respect to education 35.1% indicated “high school only or lower,” 31.4 % indicated “some college,” and 33.6% indicated having received a “Bachelor” or “Graduate” degree. 2424 participants were directed to the survey,1885 of which finished the survey (attrition rate 22%).

We followed recommendations to minimize the problem of careless responding in online studies. Specifically, we employed 10 random attention questions and time controls to check for data quality. There were 385 participants who failed more than one attention check or finished the survey in under ~22 minutes and were therefore excluded from the sample. For the 1500 participants who successfully finished the survey, completion time was 67 minutes on average (MD: 51min).

N=2119

Also through SSI we also recruited 2,119 American adults (21.5% women), who completed study materials from August 20-September 13, 2016. (Information about sampling and exclusion criteria is included in the Supplement). Age was distributed as follows: 18-24 (9.1%), 25-34 (13.8%), 35-44 (11.4%), 45-54 (2.7%), 55-65(3.6%), 65 and older (59.3%). The ethnic breakdown was: White/European American (85.9%), Black/African American (5.1%), Latino (4.1%), and “Other” (5.0%). In terms of religion, 70.7% identified as Christian, 15.7% as religiously affiliated but not Christian, and 13.7% as Atheist/Agnostic. With respect to educational status, 16.2% chose “high school or lower,” 40.4% reported “some college” and 43.4% had attained a “Bachelor” or “Graduate” degree. The median income category was $50,000-$74,999. 3425 participants were directed to the survey, 2,262 of which finished the survey (attrition rate 22 %).

We followed recommendations to minimize the problem of careless responding in online studies (Meade & Craig, 2012). Specifically, we employed 10 random attention questions and time controls to check for data quality. There were 543 participants who failed more than one attention check or finished the survey in under ~22 minutes and were therefore excluded from the sample. For the 2,119 participants who successfully finished the survey, completion time was 92 minutes on average (MD: 57min).

2 Descriptives

2.1 Means, SD, Range, & SE

Descriptives for Social Dominance Orientation, Construct and Facets
vars n mean sd median min max range se
SDO_overall 1 1500 3.74 1.44 4.00 1 8.75 7.75 0.04
Dominance_mean 2 1500 3.52 1.49 3.62 1 8.50 7.50 0.04
Antiegalitarianism_mean 3 1500 3.97 1.75 4.25 1 9.00 8.00 0.05
Descriptives for Social Dominance Orientation at Item Level
n mean sd median min max range se
Dominance1 1500 3.60 2.30 3.00 1 9.00 8.00 0.06
Dominance2 1500 3.30 2.09 3.00 1 9.00 8.00 0.05
Dominance3 1500 3.73 2.19 4.00 1 9.00 8.00 0.06
Dominance4 1500 3.27 2.25 3.00 1 9.00 8.00 0.06
Dominance5 1500 3.72 2.30 3.00 1 9.00 8.00 0.06
Dominance6 1500 3.23 2.30 3.00 1 9.00 8.00 0.06
Dominance7 1500 3.56 2.36 3.00 1 9.00 8.00 0.06
Dominance8 1500 3.76 2.23 4.00 1 9.00 8.00 0.06
Antiegalitarianism1 1500 3.90 2.41 4.00 1 9.00 8.00 0.06
Antiegalitarianism2 1500 4.53 2.66 5.00 1 9.00 8.00 0.07
Antiegalitarianism3 1500 4.05 2.46 4.00 1 9.00 8.00 0.06
Antiegalitarianism4 1500 4.61 2.58 5.00 1 9.00 8.00 0.07
Antiegalitarianism5 1500 3.32 2.07 3.00 1 9.00 8.00 0.05
Antiegalitarianism6 1500 3.83 2.18 4.00 1 9.00 8.00 0.06
Antiegalitarianism7 1500 3.53 2.17 3.00 1 9.00 8.00 0.06
Antiegalitarianism8 1500 3.97 2.37 4.00 1 9.00 8.00 0.06
SDO_overall 1500 3.74 1.44 4.00 1 8.75 7.75 0.04
Dominance_mean 1500 3.52 1.49 3.62 1 8.50 7.50 0.04
Antiegalitarianism_mean 1500 3.97 1.75 4.25 1 9.00 8.00 0.05

2.2 Likert scale distribution

2.3 Correlations

2.3.1 Correlation Plots

2.3.2 PIDF

2.3.3 Correlation Matrix



3 Demographics

3.1 Social Class




Note on the Raincloud Plots

  • Statistical summary (top): Welch’s t-test (or ANOVA) results, effect size, confidence intervals, p-values, and sample sizes are shown above each plot.
  • Bayesian analysis (bottom): Log Bayes factor and credible intervals are reported below each plot.



Social Dominance Orientation as grouped by SES
SES N Mean SD
Poor 38 -0.09 1.03
Lower Middle Class 298 -0.11 1.01
Middle Middle Class 679 0.01 1.01
Upper Middle Class 395 0.03 0.98
Rich 90 0.17 0.99
Dominance grouped by SES
SES N Mean SD
Poor 38 -0.09 0.90
Lower Middle Class 298 -0.02 1.01
Middle Middle Class 679 0.03 1.00
Upper Middle Class 395 -0.03 1.00
Rich 90 -0.02 1.03
Antiegalitarianism grouped by SES
SES N Mean SD
Poor 38 -0.06 1.08
Lower Middle Class 298 -0.16 0.95
Middle Middle Class 679 0.00 1.00
Upper Middle Class 395 0.07 1.00
Rich 90 0.29 1.03



3.2 Gender




Social Dominance Orientation as grouped by Gender
Gender N Mean SD
Male 740 0.16 0.96
Female 760 -0.15 1.01
Dominance grouped by Sex
Sex N Mean SD
Male 740 0.09 0.98
Female 760 -0.09 1.02
Antiegalitarianism grouped by Sex
Sex N Mean SD
Male 740 0.18 0.99
Female 760 -0.17 0.98



3.3 Age




Social Dominance Orientation as grouped by Age
Age N Mean SD
18-24 years 193 0.11 1.04
25-34 years 264 -0.17 1.07
35-44 years 263 0.02 1.07
45-54 years 292 -0.08 0.95
55-64 years 234 -0.08 0.94
65+ 254 0.25 0.87
Dominance grouped by Age
Age N Mean SD
18-24 years 193 0.22 0.97
25-34 years 264 -0.06 1.09
35-44 years 263 0.04 1.10
45-54 years 292 -0.09 0.95
55-64 years 234 -0.16 0.91
65+ 254 0.10 0.93
Antiegalitarianism grouped by Age
Age N Mean SD
18-24 years 193 -0.01 1.00
25-34 years 264 -0.23 1.00
35-44 years 263 -0.01 1.06
45-54 years 292 -0.05 0.98
55-64 years 234 -0.01 1.01
65+ 254 0.32 0.88



3.4 Education




Social Dominance Orientation as grouped by Education
Education N Mean SD
4 Less than High School 51 -0.08 0.93
3 High School 475 0.07 0.96
5 Some College 471 -0.11 1.04
1 Bachelor 310 0.06 0.99
2 Graduate 193 0.02 1.00
Dominance grouped by Education
Edu N Mean SD
Less than High School 51 -0.07 1.01
High School 475 0.14 0.98
Some College 471 -0.09 0.98
Bachelor 310 -0.01 1.03
Graduate 193 -0.08 1.04
Antiegalitarianism grouped by Education
Edu N Mean SD
Less than High School 51 -0.07 0.98
High School 475 0.00 0.94
Some College 471 -0.10 1.05
Bachelor 310 0.11 0.99
Graduate 193 0.10 1.01



3.5 Income Levels




Social Dominance Orientation as grouped by Income Levels
Income Levels N Mean SD
Less than $15,000 178 -0.12 0.98
$15,000-$24,999 180 -0.02 1.01
$25,000-$34,999 176 -0.04 1.02
$35,000-$49,999 227 -0.03 1.01
$50,000-$74,999 292 -0.02 0.98
$75,000-$99,999 192 0.08 1.04
$100,000-$149,999 160 0.02 0.94
$150,000 + 95 0.26 1.01
Dominance grouped by Income Levels
Income N Mean SD
Less than $15,000 178 -0.05 0.96
$15,000-$24,999 180 0.04 0.98
$25,000-$34,999 176 -0.03 1.03
$35,000-$49,999 227 -0.03 0.98
$50,000-$74,999 292 0.02 1.00
$75,000-$99,999 192 0.05 1.06
$100,000-$149,999 160 -0.05 0.99
$150,000 + 95 0.09 0.98
Antiegalitarianism grouped by Income Levels
Income N Mean SD
Less than $15,000 178 -0.16 0.94
$15,000-$24,999 180 -0.07 0.97
$25,000-$34,999 176 -0.04 0.99
$35,000-$49,999 227 -0.01 1.02
$50,000-$74,999 292 -0.05 0.99
$75,000-$99,999 192 0.09 1.02
$100,000-$149,999 160 0.08 0.99
$150,000 + 95 0.35 1.07



3.6 Ethnicity




Social Dominance Orientation as grouped by Ethnicity
Ethnicity N Mean SD
Caucasian/European origin 1237 0.07 0.98
Black/African American 115 -0.56 0.95
Latino 88 -0.12 0.96
Asian/Pacific Islander 29 0.04 1.05
Native American 13 -0.06 1.00
Other 18 -0.51 1.23
Dominance grouped by Ethnicity
Ethnicity N Mean SD
Caucasian/European origin 1237 0.03 0.99
Black/African American 115 -0.36 0.99
Latino 88 0.01 1.01
Asian/Pacific Islander 29 0.24 1.08
Native American 13 0.02 0.83
Other 18 -0.44 1.18
Antiegalitarianism grouped by Ethnicity
Ethnicity N Mean SD
Caucasian/European origin 1237 0.08 0.99
Black/African American 115 -0.62 0.88
Latino 88 -0.21 0.92
Asian/Pacific Islander 29 -0.13 0.89
Native American 13 -0.11 1.04
Other 18 -0.46 1.19



3.7 Occupation




Social Dominance Orientation as grouped by Occupation
Occupation N Mean SD
Employed 768 0.01 1.02
Retired 268 0.20 0.89
Unemployed 146 -0.25 0.95
Parent 104 0.02 1.02
Disabled 98 -0.03 1.01
Student 85 -0.24 1.09
Full-time caregiver 31 -0.05 0.92
Dominance grouped by Occupation
Occupation N Mean SD
Employed 768 -0.01 1.00
Retired 268 0.06 0.92
Unemployed 146 -0.16 1.02
Parent 104 0.14 1.11
Disabled 98 -0.07 0.94
Student 85 0.02 1.12
Full-time caregiver 31 0.23 0.94
Antiegalitarianism grouped by Occupation
Occupation N Mean SD
Employed 768 0.01 1.02
Retired 268 0.20 0.89
Unemployed 146 -0.25 0.95
Parent 104 0.02 1.02
Disabled 98 -0.03 1.01
Student 85 -0.24 1.09
Full-time caregiver 31 -0.05 0.92



3.8 Area




Social Dominance Orientation as grouped by Area
Area N Mean SD
Urban 955 -0.09 1.00
Rural 545 0.16 0.98
Dominance grouped by Area
Area N Mean SD
Urban 955 -0.07 1.02
Rural 545 0.13 0.96
Antiegalitarianism grouped by Area
Area N Mean SD
Urban 955 -0.09 1.00
Rural 545 0.16 0.98



3.9 Religious Affiliation




Social Dominance Orientation as grouped by Religious Affiliation
Religious Affiliation N Mean SD
Christian 1014 0.09 0.94
Muslim 9 0.12 0.72
Jewish 52 -0.15 1.08
Atheist/Agnostic 230 -0.36 1.15
No religion 195 -0.04 0.99
Dominance grouped by Religious Affiliation
Religious Affiliation N Mean SD
Christian 1014 0.05 0.96
Muslim 9 0.30 0.67
Jewish 52 -0.17 1.01
Atheist/Agnostic 230 -0.30 1.12
No religion 195 0.11 1.00
Antiegalitarianism grouped by Religious Affiliation
Religious Affiliation N Mean SD
Christian 1014 0.11 0.97
Muslim 9 -0.07 0.76
Jewish 52 -0.09 1.15
Atheist/Agnostic 230 -0.33 1.07
No religion 195 -0.15 0.96



4 Political Behavior

4.1 Political Orientation

Correlation with General Conservatism, Economic Conservatism, Social Conservatism





  Political Orientation Social Political Orientation Economic Political Orientation Composite Political Orientation
Predictors Estimates CI p Estimates CI p Estimates CI p Estimates CI p
(Intercept) 5.31 5.20 – 5.42 <0.001 4.93 4.80 – 5.06 <0.001 5.48 5.36 – 5.60 <0.001 5.24 5.13 – 5.35 <0.001
Social Dominance Orientation 1.14 1.03 – 1.25 <0.001 1.17 1.04 – 1.30 <0.001 1.17 1.05 – 1.29 <0.001 1.16 1.05 – 1.27 <0.001
Observations 1500 1500 1500 1500
R2 / R2 adjusted 0.216 / 0.216 0.179 / 0.179 0.197 / 0.196 0.229 / 0.228



  Political Orientation Social Political Orientation Economic Political Orientation Composite Political Orientation
Predictors Estimates CI p Estimates CI p Estimates CI p Estimates CI p
(Intercept) 0.47 0.04 – 0.90 0.033 0.03 -0.45 – 0.51 0.900 0.17 -0.32 – 0.67 0.491 0.23 -0.19 – 0.64 0.290
SDO 0.66 0.59 – 0.73 <0.001 0.64 0.57 – 0.72 <0.001 0.70 0.62 – 0.78 <0.001 0.67 0.60 – 0.74 <0.001
Age 0.23 0.17 – 0.29 <0.001 0.23 0.16 – 0.30 <0.001 0.24 0.17 – 0.31 <0.001 0.24 0.18 – 0.30 <0.001
Income 0.05 -0.00 – 0.11 0.056 -0.03 -0.09 – 0.03 0.292 0.10 0.04 – 0.16 0.002 0.04 -0.01 – 0.09 0.141
Religiosity 0.32 0.28 – 0.35 <0.001 0.44 0.40 – 0.48 <0.001 0.24 0.20 – 0.28 <0.001 0.33 0.30 – 0.37 <0.001
Education -0.11 -0.21 – -0.00 0.043 -0.15 -0.26 – -0.04 0.011 0.05 -0.07 – 0.17 0.377 -0.07 -0.17 – 0.03 0.184
Observations 1500 1500 1500 1500
R2 / R2 adjusted 0.386 / 0.384 0.409 / 0.407 0.308 / 0.305 0.415 / 0.413

4.2 Religiosity



4.3 Religiosity & Political Orientation


4.4 Candidate Preferences

4.4.1 Social Dominance Orientation and Candidate Preferences [centered]

Candidate Preferences and Social Dominance Orientation [centered]
Candidate Preference N Mean SD
Donald Trump 444 0.46 0.83
Hillary Clinton 371 -0.37 0.95
Bernie Sanders 362 -0.52 1.00
Ted Cruz 122 0.42 0.76
Jeb Bush 83 0.37 0.78
Gary Johnson 68 0.15 0.94
Rand Paul 44 0.59 0.72
Candidate Preferences and Dominance [centered]
Candidate Preference N Mean SD
Donald Trump 444 0.36 0.87
Hillary Clinton 371 -0.21 1.00
Bernie Sanders 362 -0.35 1.02
Ted Cruz 122 0.14 0.93
Jeb Bush 83 0.05 0.91
Gary Johnson 68 0.07 1.10
Rand Paul 44 0.45 0.75
Candidate Preferences and Antiegalitarianism [centered]
Candidate Preference N Mean SD
Donald Trump 444 0.45 0.87
Hillary Clinton 371 -0.42 0.88
Bernie Sanders 362 -0.55 0.88
Ted Cruz 122 0.58 0.85
Jeb Bush 83 0.57 0.88
Gary Johnson 68 0.19 0.99
Rand Paul 44 0.59 0.79



4.4.2 Social Dominance Orientation and Candidate Preferences [raw means]


4.5 Party Preferences

4.5.1 Party Preferences [centered]

Party Preferences and Social Dominance Orientation [centered]
Party Preference N Value SD
Republican Party 508 0.42 0.80
Democratic Party 560 -0.47 0.96
Libertarian Party 100 -0.01 1.06
Green Party 40 -0.93 0.84
Constitution Party 14 0.11 0.91
Tea Party 68 0.69 0.80
None 120 0.16 0.93
Don't know 90 0.28 0.88
Party Preferences and Dominance [centered]
Party Preference N Mean SD
Republican Party 508 0.29 0.87
Democratic Party 560 -0.31 1.01
Libertarian Party 100 -0.07 1.04
Green Party 40 -0.77 0.94
Constitution Party 14 -0.27 0.94
Tea Party 68 0.26 0.89
None 120 0.16 0.98
Don't know 90 0.35 0.98
Party Preferences and Antiegalitarianism [centered]
Party Preference N Mean SD
Republican Party 508 0.44 0.83
Democratic Party 560 -0.52 0.88
Libertarian Party 100 0.05 1.13
Green Party 40 -0.87 0.73
Constitution Party 14 0.40 1.21
Tea Party 68 0.91 0.88
None 120 0.13 0.90
Don't know 90 0.16 0.83


4.5.2 Party Preferences [raw means]

Party Preferences and Social Dominance Orientation [raw means]
Party Preferences N Mean SD
Republican Party 508 0.42 0.80
Democratic Party 560 -0.47 0.96
Libertarian Party 100 -0.01 1.06
Green Party 40 -0.93 0.84
Constitution Party 14 0.11 0.91
Tea Party 68 0.69 0.80
None 120 0.16 0.93
Don't know 90 0.28 0.88
$kable
Party Preferences and Dominance [raw means]
Party Preference N Mean SD
Republican Party 508 3.95 1.30
Democratic Party 560 3.06 1.51
Libertarian Party 100 3.42 1.56
Green Party 40 2.38 1.40
Constitution Party 14 3.12 1.40
Tea Party 68 3.90 1.33
None 120 3.76 1.46
Don’t know 90 4.04 1.47
$kable
Party Preferences and Antiegalitarianism [raw means]
Party Preference N Mean SD
Republican Party 508 4.73 1.46
Democratic Party 560 3.06 1.54
Libertarian Party 100 4.06 1.98
Green Party 40 2.44 1.27
Constitution Party 14 4.67 2.12
Tea Party 68 5.56 1.54
None 120 4.19 1.58
Don’t know 90 4.25 1.45


4.6 Voting

Social Dominance Orientation Candidate Preferences
  2016 [Trump vs. Clinton] 2016 [Trump vs. Clinton] + Supporters 2012 [Romney vs. Obama] 2008 [McCain vs. Obama]
Predictors Log-Odds CI p Log-Odds CI p Log-Odds CI p Log-Odds CI p
(Intercept) 2.978 -Inf – Inf <0.001 2.917 -Inf – Inf <0.001 2.877 -Inf – Inf <0.001 2.805 -Inf – Inf <0.001
Social Dominance Orientation -0.789 -Inf – Inf <0.001 -0.777 -Inf – Inf <0.001 -0.721 -Inf – Inf <0.001 -0.693 -Inf – Inf <0.001
Observations 1103 1148 1236 1206
R2 Tjur 0.225 0.220 0.187 0.176

4.7 Party Identity

Social Dominance Orientation and Party Identity & Voting
Donald Trump Hilary Clinton
Strong Republican 282 7
Republican 166 24
Leaning Republican 58 7
Independent 17 16
Leaning Democrat 10 65
Democrat 27 129
Strong Democrat 4 323
Dominance and Party Identity
Donald Trump Hilary Clinton
Strong Republican 282 7
Republican 166 24
Leaning Republican 58 7
Independent 17 16
Leaning Democrat 10 65
Democrat 27 129
Strong Democrat 4 323
Antiegalitarianism and Party Identity
Donald Trump Hilary Clinton
Strong Republican 282 7
Republican 166 24
Leaning Republican 58 7
Independent 17 16
Leaning Democrat 10 65
Democrat 27 129
Strong Democrat 4 323

4.8 Voting & Party Identity

  2016 [Clinton vs. Trump] 2016 [Trump vs. Clinton] + Supporters
Predictors Odds Ratios CI p Odds Ratios CI p
(Intercept) 51.88 25.27 – 112.99 <0.001 45.02 23.04 – 92.52 <0.001
Party Identity (dichotomous) 0.01 0.00 – 0.01 <0.001
Party Identity (dichotomous) 0.68 0.56 – 0.81 <0.001 0.67 0.56 – 0.79 <0.001
Social Dominance Orientation 0.01 0.01 – 0.01 <0.001
Observations 1103 1148
R2 Tjur 0.751 0.725



4.9 Likeability

4.10 Trump’s likeability




4.11 Clinton’s likeability





4.12 Johnson’s Likeability



5 Politico-Psychological correlates of Social Dominance Orientation

5.1 Ideologies and Partisanship



5.2 Populism, Nationalism, Nativism, and Patriotism



5.3 Political Psychology

5.4 Social Justice Concerns, Empathy, and Prejudice



5.5 Values



5.6 Pot-Pourri



5.7 Positive and Negative correlates of Social Dominance Orientation

5.7.1 Positive Correlates

5.7.2 Negative Correlates

5.8 Section Summary


5.8.1 Interaction between Social Dominance and System Justification

  Social Dominance Orientation Social Dominance Orientation Social Dominance Orientation Social Dominance Orientation Social Dominance Orientation
Predictors Estimates CI p Estimates CI p Estimates CI p Estimates CI p Estimates CI p
(Intercept) 0.00 0.00 – 0.00 <0.001 1.40 1.16 – 1.63 <0.001 2.91 2.62 – 3.19 <0.001 -0.24 -0.52 – 0.04 0.087 1.44 1.16 – 1.71 <0.001
Social Dominance Orientation 1.00 1.00 – 1.00 <0.001
Right-Wing Authoritarianism 0.45 0.41 – 0.50 <0.001
System Justification 0.17 0.11 – 0.22 <0.001
Economic System Justification 0.83 0.77 – 0.88 <0.001
Gender-specific System Justification 0.42 0.38 – 0.47 <0.001
Observations 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500
R2 / R2 adjusted 1.000 / 1.000 0.213 / 0.213 0.023 / 0.023 0.356 / 0.356 0.163 / 0.162



  Social Dominance Orientation Social Dominance Orientation Social Dominance Orientation Social Dominance Orientation Social Dominance Orientation
Predictors Estimates CI p Estimates CI p Estimates CI p Estimates CI p Estimates CI p
(Intercept) -0.00 -0.00 – -0.00 <0.001 -0.37 -1.39 – 0.65 0.479 2.91 2.62 – 3.19 <0.001 -0.24 -0.52 – 0.04 0.087 1.44 1.16 – 1.71 <0.001
SDO7_Dominance 0.50 0.50 – 0.50 <0.001
SDO7_AntiEgal 0.50 0.50 – 0.50 <0.001
SDO7_Dominance:SDO7_AntiEgal -0.00 -0.00 – 0.00 0.124
RWA_Aggression 0.41 0.17 – 0.64 0.001
RWA_Conventionalism 0.37 0.10 – 0.64 0.007
RWA_Submission 0.48 0.18 – 0.78 0.002
RWA_Aggression:RWA_Conventionalism -0.02 -0.07 – 0.03 0.349
RWA_Aggression:RWA_Submission -0.04 -0.09 – 0.02 0.220
RWA_Conventionalism:RWA_Submission -0.03 -0.09 – 0.02 0.252
RWA_Aggression:RWA_Conventionalism:RWA_Submission 0.00 -0.01 – 0.01 0.764
SJ_Gen 0.17 0.11 – 0.22 <0.001
SJ_Eco 0.83 0.77 – 0.88 <0.001
SJ_Gender 0.42 0.38 – 0.47 <0.001
Observations 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500
R2 / R2 adjusted 1.000 / 1.000 0.236 / 0.232 0.023 / 0.023 0.356 / 0.356 0.163 / 0.162