Group-based hierarchy
Sidanius and Pratto (1999) argued that group-based hierarchies exist in nearly all societies that produce an economic surplus. They distinguished three systems: an age system, a gender system and an arbitrary-set system based on socially constructed categories such as race, ethnicity, class or religion that vary across societies. The theory holds that hierarchy is maintained by individual prejudice, institutional discrimination and the behavior of both dominant and subordinate groups working together. Discrimination in housing, employment or the justice system, for example, can reproduce hierarchy even without individual intent. Sidanius and colleagues (2004) described linking these levels as the theory's agenda.
Social dominance orientation and legitimizing myths
The key individual-level concept is social dominance orientation (SDO), the degree to which a person prefers hierarchy and inequality among groups. Pratto and colleagues (1994) developed an SDO scale and reported that people higher in SDO more strongly supported racism, sexism, nationalism and military force and were less supportive of social welfare and minority rights. Ho and colleagues (2015) introduced a new scale dividing SDO into two dimensions: dominance and anti-egalitarianism. Societies contain beliefs that enhance hierarchy, such as meritocracy and stereotypes, and beliefs that attenuate it, such as human rights and egalitarianism; the theory calls these legitimizing myths. Kteily, Ho and Sidanius (2012) reported that SDO predicts a range of prejudices over time.
Comparisons and critiques
Duckitt (2001) argued that SDO and right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) stem from different motives: seeing the world as a competitive jungle raises SDO, while seeing it as dangerous raises RWA. Pratto, Sidanius and Levin (2006) summarized support for the theory across many countries and groups. Critics argue that treating hierarchy as a near-universal feature of human societies verges on evolutionary determinism, and that it is unclear whether SDO is a stable trait or an attitude that varies with context. Researchers in the social identity tradition have also argued that group identity and situations can change SDO scores themselves. Social dominance theory is, together with realistic conflict theory, a major theory of prejudice and intergroup relations.
FAQ
- What is social dominance theory in simple terms?
- It explains why societies rank groups such as races, genders and classes and keep that structure in place. It holds that individuals' preference for inequality, beliefs that justify inequality and discriminatory institutions work together.
- What is social dominance orientation (SDO)?
- It is an individual's degree of preference for hierarchy and inequality among groups. People with higher scores have been found to support discriminatory policies more and oppose policies promoting equality.
Sources reviewed: 2026-10-26
References
- Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social Dominance: An Intergroup Theory of Social Hierarchy and Oppression. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. The definitive book — group-based hierarchy and legitimizing myths.
- 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. Introduced the SDO scale — how individual differences are measured.
- Sidanius, J., Pratto, F., van Laar, C., & Levin, S. (2004). Social dominance theory: Its agenda and method. Political Psychology, 25(6), 845–880. The theory's agenda, methods and replies to critics.
- Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., & Levin, S. (2006). Social dominance theory and the dynamics of intergroup relations: Taking stock and looking forward. European Review of Social Psychology, 17(1), 271–320. A comprehensive review of 15 years of evidence.
- Duckitt, J. (2001). A dual-process cognitive-motivational theory of ideology and prejudice. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 41–113. SDO and RWA as two distinct motivational routes to prejudice.
- Kteily, N. S., Ho, A. K., & Sidanius, J. (2012). Hierarchy in the mind: The predictive power of social dominance orientation across social contexts and domains. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(2), 543–549. Longitudinal evidence that SDO predicts prejudice across contexts.
- Ho, A. K., Sidanius, J., Kteily, N., Sheehy-Skeffington, J., Pratto, F., Henkel, K. E., Foels, R., & Stewart, A. L. (2015). The nature of social dominance orientation: Theorizing and measuring preferences for intergroup inequality using the new SDO₇ scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109(6), 1003–1028. The SDO₇ scale — dominance and anti-egalitarianism dimensions.