The David and Goliath principle: Cultural, ideological, and attitudinal underpinnings of the normative protection of low-status groups from criticism
Jeffries, Carla H., Hornsey, Matthew J., Sutton, Robbie M., Douglas, Karen M., & Bain, Paul G. (2012) The David and Goliath principle: Cultural, ideological, and attitudinal underpinnings of the normative protection of low-status groups from criticism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(8), pp. 1053-1065.
Two studies documented the “David and Goliath” rule—the tendency for people to perceive criticism of “David” groups (groups with low power and status) as less normatively permissible than criticism of “Goliath” groups (groups with high power and status). The authors confirmed the existence of the David and Goliath rule across Western and Chinese cultures (Study 1). However, the rule was endorsed more strongly in Western than in Chinese cultures, an effect mediated by cultural differences in power distance. Study 2 identified the psychological underpinnings of this rule in an Australian sample. Lower social dominance orientation (SDO) was associated with greater endorsement of the rule, an effect mediated through the differential attribution of stereotypes. Specifically, those low in SDO were more likely to attribute traits of warmth and incompetence to David versus Goliath groups, a pattern of stereotypes that was related to the protection of David groups from criticism.
Impact and interest:
Citation counts are sourced monthly from and citation databases.
These databases contain citations from different subsets of available publications and different time periods and thus the citation count from each is usually different. Some works are not in either database and no count is displayed. Scopus includes citations from articles published in 1996 onwards, and Web of Science® generally from 1980 onwards.
Citations counts from theindexing service can be viewed at the linked Google Scholar™ search.
|Item Type:||Journal Article|
|Keywords:||criticism, culture, power distance, social dominance ideology, stereotypes|
|Subjects:||Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > PSYCHOLOGY AND COGNITIVE SCIENCES (170000) > PSYCHOLOGY (170100) > Social and Community Psychology (170113)|
|Divisions:||Current > QUT Faculties and Divisions > Faculty of Health
Current > Schools > School of Psychology & Counselling
|Copyright Owner:||Copyright 2012 Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc|
|Deposited On:||02 Apr 2015 03:09|
|Last Modified:||13 Apr 2015 00:09|
Repository Staff Only: item control page