PPBS

Social Dominance Orientation [2018]

A Politico-Psychological Analysis

Report generated

March 23, 2026

1 Study Characteristics

1.1 Items: Social Dominance Orientation

1.2 Sample

N=TBD

Sample description for the 2018 PPBS CINT Post-election study to be added.

2 Descriptives

2.1 Means, SD, Range, & SE

Table 1: Descriptives
Descriptives for Social Dominance Orientation
mean sd median max range
Dominance_mean 3.51 1.54 3.75 8.25 7.25
Antiegalitarianism_mean 3.78 1.68 4.00 9.00 8.00
SDO 3.65 1.46 3.88 8.25 7.25
Note:
n = 2759, min = 1, se = 0.03
Table 2: Descriptives – Item Level
Descriptives for Social Dominance Orientation at Item Level
mean sd median se
Dominance1 4.06 2.49 5.00 0.05
Dominance2 3.63 2.18 4.00 0.04
Dominance3 4.00 2.24 5.00 0.04
Dominance4 3.43 2.31 3.00 0.04
Dominance5 3.25 2.07 3.00 0.04
Dominance6 2.93 2.03 2.00 0.04
Dominance7 3.29 2.21 3.00 0.04
Dominance8 3.54 2.09 4.00 0.04
Antiegalitarianism1 3.95 2.38 4.00 0.05
Antiegalitarianism2 4.52 2.60 5.00 0.05
Antiegalitarianism3 4.07 2.41 5.00 0.05
Antiegalitarianism4 4.69 2.49 5.00 0.05
Antiegalitarianism5 2.84 1.88 2.00 0.04
Antiegalitarianism6 3.49 2.06 3.00 0.04
Antiegalitarianism7 3.07 1.96 3.00 0.04
Antiegalitarianism8 3.59 2.20 4.00 0.04
SDO 3.65 1.46 3.88 0.03
Dominance_mean 3.51 1.54 3.75 0.03
Antiegalitarianism_mean 3.78 1.68 4.00 0.03
Note:
All items: n = 2759, min = 1, max = 9. SDO: min = 1, max = 8.25. Dominance_mean: min = 1, max = 8.25. Antiegalitarianism_mean: min = 1, max = 9

2.2 Response Distribution

Figure 1: Proportion of each facet of Social Dominance Orientation at item level: Dominance
Figure 2: Proportion of each facet of Social Dominance Orientation at item level: Antiegalitarianism
Figure 3: Dominance
Figure 4: Antiegalitarianism

2.3 Correlations

2.3.1 Correlation Plots

Figure 5: Bivariate Spearman correlations: Social Dominance Orientation
Figure 6: Bivariate Spearman correlations: Dominance
Figure 7: Bivariate Spearman correlations: Antiegalitarianism

Note. Upper triangle shows Spearman’s rank-order correlations. *** p < .001, ** p < .01, * p < .05.

2.3.2 PIDF

Figure 8: Bivariate Spearman correlations by party identity: Social Dominance Orientation
Figure 9: Bivariate Spearman correlations by party identity: Dominance
Figure 10: Bivariate Spearman correlations by party identity: Antiegalitarianism

Note. Upper triangle shows Spearman’s rank-order correlations by party identity. *** p < .001, ** p < .01, * p < .05.

2.3.3 Correlation Matrix

3 Demographics

3.1 Social Class

Figure 11: Social Dominance Orientation
Figure 12: Dominance
Figure 13: Antiegalitarianism
Figure 14: Social Dominance Orientation
Figure 15: Dominance
Figure 16: Antiegalitarianism

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.
Table 3
Table 4: Antiegalitarianism as grouped by SES
(a)
SES N Mean SD
Poor 116 -0.10 1.03
Lower Middle Class 470 -0.07 0.98
Middle Middle Class 1249 0.09 0.98
Upper Middle Class 924 -0.07 1.02
(b)
SES N Mean SD
Poor 116 0.00 1.03
Lower Middle Class 470 0.00 1.00
Middle Middle Class 1249 0.08 0.99
Upper Middle Class 924 -0.10 1.01
(c)
SES N Mean SD
Poor 116 -0.18 1.00
Lower Middle Class 470 -0.11 0.96
Middle Middle Class 1249 0.09 0.99
Upper Middle Class 924 -0.04 1.03

3.2 Gender

Figure 17: Social Dominance Orientation Facets, as grouped by Gender: Social Dominance Orientation
Figure 18: Social Dominance Orientation Facets, as grouped by Gender: Dominance
Figure 19: Social Dominance Orientation Facets, as grouped by Gender: Antiegalitarianism
Figure 20: Social Dominance Orientation
Figure 21: Dominance
Figure 22: Antiegalitarianism
Table 5
Table 6: Antiegalitarianism as grouped by Gender
(a)
Gender N Mean SD
Female 1370 -0.12 0.98
Male 1389 0.12 1.00
(b)
Gender N Mean SD
Female 1370 -0.14 0.97
Male 1389 0.14 1.01
(c)
Gender N Mean SD
Female 1370 -0.09 0.99
Male 1389 0.09 1.00

3.3 Age

Figure 23: Social Dominance Orientation
Figure 24: Dominance
Figure 25: Antiegalitarianism
Figure 26: Social Dominance Orientation
Figure 27: Dominance
Figure 28: Antiegalitarianism
Table 7
Table 8: Antiegalitarianism as grouped by Age
(a)
Age N Mean SD
18-24 years 295 -0.07 0.97
25-34 years 494 -0.11 1.05
35-44 years 451 0.03 1.04
45-54 years 458 0.06 0.94
55-64 years 470 0.04 1.03
NA 591 0.03 0.96
(b)
Age N Mean SD
18-24 years 295 0.00 0.97
25-34 years 494 -0.05 1.05
35-44 years 451 0.06 1.02
45-54 years 458 0.06 0.99
55-64 years 470 -0.02 1.00
NA 591 -0.04 0.96
(c)
Age N Mean SD
18-24 years 295 -0.13 0.93
25-34 years 494 -0.15 1.01
35-44 years 451 -0.01 1.04
45-54 years 458 0.05 0.96
55-64 years 470 0.08 1.04
NA 591 0.09 0.97

3.4 Education

Figure 29: Social Dominance Orientation
Figure 30: Dominance
Figure 31: Antiegalitarianism
Figure 32: Social Dominance Orientation
Figure 33: Dominance
Figure 34: Antiegalitarianism
Table 9
Table 10: Antiegalitarianism as grouped by Education
(a)
Education N Mean SD
Less than High School 312 0.13 0.99
High School 767 0.14 0.93
Some College 779 -0.03 1.01
Bachelor or higher 901 -0.14 1.03
(b)
Education N Mean SD
Less than High School 312 0.21 1.00
High School 767 0.14 0.95
Some College 779 -0.02 0.99
Bachelor or higher 901 -0.17 1.02
(c)
Education N Mean SD
Less than High School 312 0.04 0.97
High School 767 0.11 0.95
Some College 779 -0.03 1.01
Bachelor or higher 901 -0.08 1.03

3.5 Income Levels

Figure 35: Social Dominance Orientation
Figure 36: Dominance
Figure 37: Antiegalitarianism
Figure 38: Social Dominance Orientation
Figure 39: Dominance
Figure 40: Antiegalitarianism
Table 11
Table 12: Antiegalitarianism as grouped by Income Levels
(a)
Income Levels N Mean SD
Less than $15,000 310 -0.07 1.00
$15,000-$24,999 275 -0.10 1.00
$25,000-$34,999 260 -0.03 0.95
$35,000-$49,999 351 0.04 0.98
$50,000-$74,999 495 0.04 1.01
$75,000-$99,999 355 0.05 1.00
$100,000-$149,999 384 -0.05 1.05
$150,000 + 329 0.08 0.99
(b)
Income Levels N Mean SD
Less than $15,000 310 0.01 1.03
$15,000-$24,999 275 -0.05 1.03
$25,000-$34,999 260 0.00 0.96
$35,000-$49,999 351 0.08 0.94
$50,000-$74,999 495 -0.01 1.02
$75,000-$99,999 355 0.03 0.98
$100,000-$149,999 384 -0.06 1.02
$150,000 + 329 0.00 1.00
(c)
Income Levels N Mean SD
Less than $15,000 310 -0.13 0.98
$15,000-$24,999 275 -0.12 0.97
$25,000-$34,999 260 -0.05 0.96
$35,000-$49,999 351 0.00 0.98
$50,000-$74,999 495 0.07 1.00
$75,000-$99,999 355 0.06 1.00
$100,000-$149,999 384 -0.03 1.04
$150,000 + 329 0.14 1.01

3.6 Ethnicity

Figure 41: Social Dominance Orientation
Figure 42: Dominance
Figure 43: Antiegalitarianism

Note on the Okabe-Ito color palette. The Okabe-Ito color palette (seen above) is a set of colorblind-friendly categorical colors available in R. We are using this palette for graphs with non-ordered variables (e.g., groups, categories) for accessibility.

Figure 44: Social Dominance Orientation
Figure 45: Dominance
Figure 46: Antiegalitarianism
Table 13
Table 14: Antiegalitarianism as grouped by Ethnicity
(a)
Ethnicity N Mean SD
Black/African American 501 -0.25 1.00
Asian/Pacific Islander 87 0.12 0.89
Native American 14 0.23 0.75
Other 35 -0.48 0.86
NA 1976 0.07 1.00
NA 140 -0.04 0.98
NA 6 0.31 0.74
(b)
Ethnicity N Mean SD
Black/African American 501 -0.14 1.05
Asian/Pacific Islander 87 0.21 0.92
Native American 14 0.06 0.87
Other 35 -0.55 0.86
NA 1976 0.03 0.99
NA 140 0.08 1.00
NA 6 0.52 0.56
(c)
Ethnicity N Mean SD
Black/African American 501 -0.30 0.96
Asian/Pacific Islander 87 0.02 0.85
Native American 14 0.34 0.96
Other 35 -0.34 1.01
NA 1976 0.09 1.01
NA 140 -0.14 0.93
NA 6 0.06 0.80

3.7 Occupation

Figure 47: Social Dominance Orientation
Figure 48: Dominance
Figure 49: Antiegalitarianism
Figure 50: Social Dominance Orientation
Figure 51: Dominance
Figure 52: Antiegalitarianism
Table 15
Table 16: Antiegalitarianism as grouped by Occupation
(a)
Occupation N Mean SD
Employed 1334 0.01 1.02
Retired 634 0.06 0.97
Unemployed 273 -0.01 0.99
Parent 126 0.09 0.95
Disabled 201 -0.28 0.98
Student 153 -0.07 0.97
Full-time caregiver 38 0.13 0.86
(b)
Occupation N Mean SD
Employed 1334 0.03 1.02
Retired 634 -0.01 0.98
Unemployed 273 0.00 0.98
Parent 126 0.07 0.96
Disabled 201 -0.21 1.00
Student 153 -0.02 0.93
Full-time caregiver 38 0.14 0.95
(c)
Occupation N Mean SD
Employed 1334 -0.01 1.02
Retired 634 0.11 0.98
Unemployed 273 -0.02 0.96
Parent 126 0.10 1.01
Disabled 201 -0.30 0.96
Student 153 -0.10 0.97
Full-time caregiver 38 0.10 0.96

3.8 Area

Figure 53: Social Dominance Orientation
Figure 54: Dominance
Figure 55: Antiegalitarianism
Figure 56: Social Dominance Orientation
Figure 57: Dominance
Figure 58: Antiegalitarianism
Table 17
Table 18: Antiegalitarianism as grouped by Area
(a)
Area N Mean SD
Urban 723 -0.11 1.00
Rural 658 0.12 1.02
NA 1378 0.00 0.99
(b)
Area N Mean SD
Urban 723 -0.02 1.02
Rural 658 0.08 0.99
NA 1378 -0.03 0.99
(c)
Area N Mean SD
Urban 723 -0.16 0.97
Rural 658 0.14 1.06
NA 1378 0.02 0.98

3.9 Religious Affiliation

Figure 59: Social Dominance Orientation
Figure 60: Dominance
Figure 61: Antiegalitarianism
Figure 62: Social Dominance Orientation
Figure 63: Dominance
Figure 64: Antiegalitarianism
Table 19
Table 20: Antiegalitarianism as grouped by Religious Affiliation
(a)
Religious Affiliation N Mean SD
Catholic 573 0.13 0.91
Protestant 1237 0.12 0.97
Jewish 72 -0.47 0.93
Muslim 22 -0.53 1.03
Atheist/Agnostic 420 -0.46 1.07
Don't know / refused 435 0.02 0.99
(b)
Religious Affiliation N Mean SD
Catholic 573 0.13 0.96
Protestant 1237 0.09 0.98
Jewish 72 -0.38 0.97
Muslim 22 -0.16 1.17
Atheist/Agnostic 420 -0.44 1.01
Don't know / refused 435 0.05 0.98
(c)
Religious Affiliation N Mean SD
Catholic 573 0.11 0.92
Protestant 1237 0.13 0.99
Jewish 72 -0.48 0.83
Muslim 22 -0.77 0.92
Atheist/Agnostic 420 -0.40 1.06
Don't know / refused 435 -0.02 0.98

3.10 Section Summary

  Social Dominance Orientation
Predictors Estimates CI p
(Intercept) 3.27 3.02 – 3.53 <.001
Age 0.06 0.02 – 0.09 .001
Income 0.06 0.03 – 0.09 <.001
Education -0.22 -0.28 – -0.16 <.001
Gender (Male) 0.33 0.22 – 0.44 <.001
Observations 2759
R2 / R2 adjusted .038 / .037

4 Political Behavior

4.1 Political Orientation

Correlation with General Conservatism, Economic Conservatism, Social Conservatism

Figure 65: Social Dominance Orientation
Figure 66: Dominance
Figure 67: Antiegalitarianism
Figure 68: Social Dominance Orientation
Figure 69: Dominance
Figure 70: Antiegalitarianism
Figure 71: Social Dominance Orientation
Figure 72: Dominance
Figure 73: Antiegalitarianism

Note. The y-axis shows residuals after regressing the outcome on demographics (Age, Income, Education, Gender). This illustrates how much the focal construct explains beyond demographic factors.

Table 21: Social Dominance Orientation and Political Orientation
  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) 51.52 50.53 – 52.51 <.001 49.15 48.07 – 50.22 <.001 54.08 53.04 – 55.11 <.001 51.58 50.63 – 52.53 <.001
Social Dominance Orientation 13.60 12.61 – 14.59 <.001 14.51 13.44 – 15.58 <.001 13.39 12.35 – 14.42 <.001 13.83 12.88 – 14.79 <.001
Observations 2759 2759 2759 2759
R2 / R2 adjusted .208 / .208 .204 / .204 .190 / .190 .227 / .226
  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) 51.52 50.49 – 52.56 <.001 49.15 48.03 – 50.26 <.001 54.08 53.00 – 55.16 <.001 51.58 50.58 – 52.58 <.001
Dominance 11.00 9.97 – 12.04 <.001 11.98 10.86 – 13.09 <.001 10.29 9.21 – 11.37 <.001 11.09 10.09 – 12.09 <.001
Observations 2759 2759 2759 2759
R2 / R2 adjusted .136 / .136 .139 / .139 .112 / .112 .146 / .145
  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) 51.52 50.53 – 52.51 <.001 49.15 48.07 – 50.22 <.001 54.08 53.05 – 55.10 <.001 51.58 50.63 – 52.53 <.001
Antiegalitarianism 13.63 12.64 – 14.62 <.001 14.32 13.25 – 15.40 <.001 13.91 12.89 – 14.93 <.001 13.95 13.00 – 14.90 <.001
Observations 2759 2759 2759 2759
R2 / R2 adjusted .209 / .209 .199 / .198 .205 / .205 .231 / .231
Table 22: Social Dominance Orientation models and Demographics
  Political Orientation Social Political Orientation Economic Political Orientation
Predictors Estimates CI p Estimates CI p Estimates CI p
(Intercept) 9.31 4.14 – 14.48 <.001 8.87 3.30 – 14.45 .002 6.21 0.84 – 11.58 .023
SDO 8.98 8.29 – 9.66 <.001 9.52 8.78 – 10.25 <.001 8.84 8.13 – 9.55 <.001
Age 2.25 1.65 – 2.84 <.001 2.80 2.16 – 3.44 <.001 2.23 1.61 – 2.85 <.001
Income 1.07 0.59 – 1.55 <.001 0.61 0.09 – 1.13 .021 1.46 0.96 – 1.96 <.001
Education -1.66 -2.73 – -0.58 .003 -2.84 -4.00 – -1.68 <.001 -0.67 -1.78 – 0.45 .241
Gender (Male) 0.45 -1.52 – 2.43 .654 0.12 -2.01 – 2.25 .909 1.51 -0.54 – 3.56 .150
Observations 2759 2759 2759
R2 / R2 adjusted .229 / .227 .228 / .227 .216 / .215

4.2 Partisanship

Figure 74: Social Dominance Orientation
Figure 75: Dominance
Figure 76: Antiegalitarianism
Table 23: Mean Social Dominance Orientation by Party Identity (raw means)
Party Identity N Mean SD
Democrat 1100 3.05 1.40
Republican 819 4.45 1.22
Don't Know/Other 104 3.90 1.40
Independent/Moderate 736 3.60 1.37
Table 24: Mean Dominance by Party Identity (raw means)
Party Identity N Mean SD
Democrat 1100 3.04 1.52
Republican 819 4.18 1.38
Don't Know/Other 104 3.81 1.47
Independent/Moderate 736 3.44 1.45
Table 25: Mean Antiegalitarianism by Party Identity (raw means)
Party Identity N Mean SD
Democrat 1100 3.07 1.52
Republican 819 4.73 1.49
Don't Know/Other 104 3.99 1.48
Independent/Moderate 736 3.76 1.60
Table 26: Social Dominance Orientation & Party Identity (7-point)
  Social Dominance Orientation
Predictors Estimates CI p
(Intercept) 2.36 2.23 – 2.48 <.001
Party Identity (7-point) 0.35 0.32 – 0.38 <.001
Observations 1919
R2 / R2 adjusted .214 / .214
  Dominance
Predictors Estimates CI p
(Intercept) 2.47 2.33 – 2.61 <.001
Party Identity (7-point) 0.29 0.25 – 0.32 <.001
Observations 1919
R2 / R2 adjusted .130 / .129
  Antiegalitarianism
Predictors Estimates CI p
(Intercept) 2.24 2.10 – 2.39 <.001
Party Identity (7-point) 0.41 0.38 – 0.45 <.001
Observations 1919
R2 / R2 adjusted .228 / .228
Table 27: Social Dominance Orientation & Party Identity with Controls
  Social Dominance Orientation
Predictors Estimates CI p
(Intercept) 2.53 2.23 – 2.83 <.001
Party Identity (7-point) 0.34 0.31 – 0.37 <.001
Age -0.01 -0.05 – 0.02 .485
Income 0.02 -0.01 – 0.05 .129
Education -0.18 -0.24 – -0.11 <.001
Gender (Male) 0.20 0.08 – 0.31 .001
Observations 1919
R2 / R2 adjusted .232 / .230
  Dominance
Predictors Estimates CI p
(Intercept) 2.71 2.39 – 3.04 <.001
Party Identity (7-point) 0.28 0.25 – 0.32 <.001
Age -0.05 -0.09 – -0.01 .012
Income 0.01 -0.02 – 0.04 .555
Education -0.19 -0.26 – -0.12 <.001
Gender (Male) 0.31 0.18 – 0.44 <.001
Observations 1919
R2 / R2 adjusted .159 / .157
  Antiegalitarianism
Predictors Estimates CI p
(Intercept) 2.35 2.01 – 2.69 <.001
Party Identity (7-point) 0.40 0.37 – 0.44 <.001
Age 0.02 -0.02 – 0.07 .236
Income 0.04 0.00 – 0.07 .037
Education -0.16 -0.23 – -0.09 <.001
Gender (Male) 0.08 -0.05 – 0.22 .225
Observations 1919
R2 / R2 adjusted .237 / .235

4.3 Religiosity

Figure 77: Social Dominance Orientation
Figure 78: Dominance
Figure 79: Antiegalitarianism
Figure 80: Social Dominance Orientation
Figure 81: Dominance
Figure 82: Antiegalitarianism

Note. The y-axis shows residuals after regressing the outcome on demographics (Age, Income, Education, Gender). This illustrates how much the focal construct explains beyond demographic factors.

Figure 83: Social Dominance Orientation
Figure 84: Dominance
Figure 85: Antiegalitarianism

4.4 Candidate Preferences

Figure 86: Social Dominance Orientation
Figure 87: Dominance
Figure 88: Antiegalitarianism
Table 28: Candidate Preference and Social Dominance Orientation [centered]
Candidate Preference N Mean SD
Donald Trump 770 0.60 0.81
Hillary Clinton 714 -0.29 0.95
Bernie Sanders 592 -0.58 0.94
Ted Cruz 83 0.54 0.74
Jeb Bush 44 0.24 0.83
Gary Johnson 43 0.05 0.80
Rand Paul 30 0.30 0.83
John Kasich 88 0.00 0.90
Jill Stein 32 -0.69 0.97
Ben Carson 82 0.24 0.79
Marco Rubio 38 0.35 0.75
None 243 0.06 0.91
Table 29: Candidate Preference and Dominance [centered]
Candidate Preference N Mean SD
Donald Trump 770 0.55 0.87
Hillary Clinton 714 -0.19 1.00
Bernie Sanders 592 -0.51 0.93
Ted Cruz 83 0.24 0.85
Jeb Bush 44 0.13 0.83
Gary Johnson 43 -0.16 0.96
Rand Paul 30 0.11 0.77
John Kasich 88 -0.13 0.87
Jill Stein 32 -0.59 1.03
Ben Carson 82 -0.02 0.81
Marco Rubio 38 0.15 0.75
None 243 0.09 0.91
Table 30: Candidate Preference and Antiegalitarianism [centered]
Candidate Preference N Mean SD
Donald Trump 770 0.54 0.86
Hillary Clinton 714 -0.33 0.91
Bernie Sanders 592 -0.55 0.89
Ted Cruz 83 0.73 0.86
Jeb Bush 44 0.30 1.01
Gary Johnson 43 0.24 0.82
Rand Paul 30 0.42 0.99
John Kasich 88 0.12 0.93
Jill Stein 32 -0.67 0.87
Ben Carson 82 0.43 0.85
Marco Rubio 38 0.47 0.85
None 243 0.02 0.91
Table 31: Candidate Preference and Social Dominance Orientation [raw means]
Candidate Preference N Mean SD
Donald Trump 770 4.52 1.18
Hillary Clinton 714 3.22 1.39
Bernie Sanders 592 2.79 1.37
Ted Cruz 83 4.44 1.08
Jeb Bush 44 4.00 1.22
Gary Johnson 43 3.73 1.17
Rand Paul 30 4.08 1.21
John Kasich 88 3.65 1.32
Jill Stein 32 2.63 1.41
Ben Carson 82 3.99 1.16
Marco Rubio 38 4.15 1.09
None 243 3.73 1.32
Table 32: Candidate Preference and Dominance [raw means]
Candidate Preference N Mean SD
Donald Trump 770 4.35 1.33
Hillary Clinton 714 3.23 1.54
Bernie Sanders 592 2.73 1.43
Ted Cruz 83 3.88 1.30
Jeb Bush 44 3.71 1.27
Gary Johnson 43 3.27 1.47
Rand Paul 30 3.68 1.18
John Kasich 88 3.32 1.33
Jill Stein 32 2.61 1.58
Ben Carson 82 3.48 1.24
Marco Rubio 38 3.75 1.16
None 243 3.65 1.40
Table 33: Candidate Preference and Antiegalitarianism [raw means]
Candidate Preference N Mean SD
Donald Trump 770 4.69 1.45
Hillary Clinton 714 3.22 1.52
Bernie Sanders 592 2.86 1.50
Ted Cruz 83 5.00 1.45
Jeb Bush 44 4.29 1.70
Gary Johnson 43 4.18 1.37
Rand Paul 30 4.48 1.66
John Kasich 88 3.97 1.55
Jill Stein 32 2.66 1.46
Ben Carson 82 4.51 1.42
Marco Rubio 38 4.56 1.42
None 243 3.81 1.52

4.5 Party Preferences

Figure 89: Social Dominance Orientation
Figure 90: Dominance
Figure 91: Antiegalitarianism
Table 34: Party Preference and Social Dominance Orientation [centered]
Party Preference N Mean SD
Democrat Party 1251 -0.39 0.96
Republican Party 898 0.51 0.82
Libertarian Party 150 0.24 0.91
Green Party 68 -1.01 0.75
Tea Party 71 0.74 0.70
None 321 0.01 0.92
Table 35: Party Preference and Dominance [centered]
Party Preference N Mean SD
Democrat Party 1251 -0.29 0.98
Republican Party 898 0.43 0.89
Libertarian Party 150 0.08 0.88
Green Party 68 -0.90 0.73
Tea Party 71 0.44 0.94
None 321 0.01 0.95
Table 36: Party Preference and Antiegalitarianism [centered]
Party Preference N Mean SD
Democrat Party 1251 -0.41 0.91
Republican Party 898 0.51 0.87
Libertarian Party 150 0.35 1.01
Green Party 68 -0.93 0.73
Tea Party 71 0.88 0.69
None 321 0.02 0.90
Table 37: Party Preference and Social Dominance Orientation [raw means]
Party Preference N Mean SD
Democrat Party 1251 3.08 1.40
Republican Party 898 4.40 1.20
Libertarian Party 150 4.00 1.33
Green Party 68 2.18 1.10
Tea Party 71 4.72 1.02
None 321 3.67 1.34
Table 38: Party Preference and Dominance [raw means]
Party Preference N Mean SD
Democrat Party 1251 3.06 1.51
Republican Party 898 4.17 1.36
Libertarian Party 150 3.64 1.35
Green Party 68 2.14 1.13
Tea Party 71 4.19 1.44
None 321 3.53 1.45
Table 39: Party Preference and Antiegalitarianism [raw means]
Party Preference N Mean SD
Democrat Party 1251 3.09 1.52
Republican Party 898 4.63 1.46
Libertarian Party 150 4.37 1.69
Green Party 68 2.22 1.23
Tea Party 71 5.25 1.16
None 321 3.81 1.51

4.6 Voting

Table 40: Social Dominance Orientation Voting Preferences
  2016 [Trump vs. Clinton] 2012 [Romney vs. Obama] 2008 [McCain vs. Obama]
Predictors Log-Odds CI p Log-Odds CI p Log-Odds CI p
(Intercept) .694 -Inf – Inf <.001 1.068 -Inf – Inf <.001 1.030 -Inf – Inf <.001
Social Dominance Orientation -0.940 -Inf – Inf <.001 -0.767 -Inf – Inf <.001 -0.698 -Inf – Inf <.001
Observations 2759 2759 2759
R2 Tjur .106 .042 .055
Figure 92: Social Dominance Orientation
Figure 93: Dominance
Figure 94: Antiegalitarianism

4.7 Voting & Party Identity

Table 41

4.8 Likeability

5 Politico-Psychological correlates of Social Dominance Orientation


5.1 Ideologies and Partisanship

Figure 95: Social Dominance Orientation (by magnitude)
Figure 96: Dominance
Figure 97: Antiegalitarianism
Figure 98: Social Dominance Orientation (alphabetic)
Figure 99: Dominance
Figure 100: Antiegalitarianism

5.2 Populism, Nationalism, Nativism, and Patriotism

Figure 101: Social Dominance Orientation (by magnitude)
Figure 102: Dominance
Figure 103: Antiegalitarianism
Figure 104: Social Dominance Orientation (alphabetic)
Figure 105: Dominance
Figure 106: Antiegalitarianism



5.3 Political Psychology

Figure 107: Social Dominance Orientation (by magnitude)
Figure 108: Dominance
Figure 109: Antiegalitarianism
Figure 110: Social Dominance Orientation (alphabetic)
Figure 111: Dominance
Figure 112: Antiegalitarianism



5.4 Positive and Negative correlates of Social Dominance Orientation

Figure 113: Social Dominance Orientation (by magnitude)
Figure 114: Dominance
Figure 115: Antiegalitarianism
Figure 116: Social Dominance Orientation (alphabetic)
Figure 117: Dominance
Figure 118: Antiegalitarianism
Figure 119: Social Dominance Orientation (by magnitude)
Figure 120: Dominance
Figure 121: Antiegalitarianism
Figure 122: Social Dominance Orientation (alphabetic)
Figure 123: Dominance
Figure 124: Antiegalitarianism

6 Elastic Net Analysis

Figure 125: Elastic net predicting Social Dominance Orientation: Political Psychology
Figure 126: Elastic net predicting Social Dominance Orientation: Ideology & Partisanship
Figure 127: Elastic net predicting Social Dominance Orientation: Demographics
Figure 128: Elastic net predicting Social Dominance Orientation: Attitudes
Figure 129: Elastic net predicting Social Dominance Orientation: Everything
Table 42: Elastic Net Summary
Elastic Net R² for predicting Social Dominance Orientation
Variable Group # Predictors R²
Political Psychology 4 .472
Ideology & Partisanship 5 .253
Demographics 5 .043
Attitudes 4 .857
Everything 18 .868
PPBS
Psychology of Political Behavior Studies PI: Flavio Azevedo