The Dimensions of Nonauthoritarianism

The converse of authoritarianism has not been conceptualized very clearly though scales purporting to measure nonauthoritarianism are among the most commonly used in. personality inventories. Using the Autonomy scale of the Omnibus Personality Inventory (a derivative of the original California F scale), as administered to a sample population of beck and white college freshmen, the dimensions of nonauthoritarianism were explored. A factor analysis of the scale creates three components (anti-authoritarianism, anti-conventionalism and open-mindedness) that are conceived of as successive phases in the weakening of authoritarianism. This phase hypothesis is supported with evidence from Guttman scales and a correlational analysis of how black and lower-class as compared to white and middle-class students shift from one phase to another over the course of the freshman year.     

Authoritarianism as a Group Phenomenon

A model of authoritarianism on a group level of analysis based on Duckitt's concept of authoritarianism is presented. This conceptualization is called group authoritarianism (GA), which is defined as the belief about the appropriate relationship that should exist between groups and their individual members. The process model of group authoritarianism connects traditional authoritarianism theories with the Social Identity Approach. According to this model group-authoritarianism reflects the situation-specific activation of an authoritarian disposition in group contexts. Thus, group authoritarianism provides a perspective according to which personality characteristics and general psychological mechanisms described by Social-Identity Theory (SIT) and Self-Categorization Theory (SCT) interact in predicting intergroup hostility and intergroup discrimination. This article describes the development of a group authoritarianism scale as well as an experimental study that tests the main assumption of the group authoritarianism process model. The results confirm the reliability and validity of the group authoritarianism scales and the main hypothesis of the group authoritarianism model.     

Authoritarianism, dominance and assertiveness

It is shown that there are definitions of the three constructs of authoritarianism, dominance and assertiveness which read very similarly; so much so that no distinction is immediately evident. It is proposed that authoritarianism might be conceived as aggressive dominance and at least some types of assertiveness as nonaggressive dominance. A new scale of Dominance suitable for general population use was produced, and compared with the existing Ray (1976) behavior inventory of authoritarianism. Both scales showed highly significant correlations with peer rated dominance and submission (the latter being negative in sign) but only the authoritarianism scale showed significant correlations with rated aggressiveness and rigidity. It was concluded that the new definitions could be operationalized into valid scales.     

A comparison of various authoritarianism scales in Belgian Flanders

The present study compared in a Flemish adult sample (N = 480) four recently developed authoritarianism scales as well as the widely used Right‐Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) scale. Results revealed that all these measures were strongly related and that they showed relationships of comparable magnitude with various indicators of right‐wing ideology such as conservatism and racism, as well as with political party preferences. Analyses confirmed the superior fit of a multidimensional model for the scales that are assumed to have an explicit underlying multidimensional structure, but it was also revealed that there was little consensus on what these dimensions exactly mean. Finally, the results indicated serious problems of overlap between cultural conservatism and authoritarianism for some of the scales. Having relied exclusively on an empirical method for comparing the utility of these scales, the use of other criteria for a final assessment of the authoritarianism scales is elaborated upon. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Predicting authoritarian behaviour: analysis of three measures

This study investigated the behavioural validity of three recent measures of authoritarianism, namely, the Right-wing Authoritarianism scale (RWA; Altemeyer, 1981), the Ray (1972) BF scale, and the Ray (1976) Directiveness (DIR) scale. The best predictors of various dimensions of authoritarian behaviour were the RWA and DIR scales, while the BF scale was found to only predict conservative behaviour. These findings are discussed in the light of current research into authoritarianism.     

Dogmatism in relation to sub-types of conservatism: Some Australian data

An examination of the relation between authoritarianism and conservatism is made using newly developed balanced forms of the ‘D’ and ‘F’ scales together with scales to measure political, social, moral and economic conservatism. Neither ‘BD’ nor ‘BF’ scales predicted voting preference. The ‘BD’ scale was significantly, positively related to the political, social and moral conservatism scales but was non-significantly, negatively related to economic conservatism. It was concluded that both the ‘BD’ and ‘BF’ scales are equally good measures of general authoritarianism among supporters of Australian political parties and that while it is in general true that dogmatic people tend to be ideologically conservative, an exception must be made for economic conservatism. This exception is seen to be inferable from the theory of ‘working class authoritarianism’ advanced by Lipset (1960).     

Construction and validation of a measure of authoritarian personality

This paper reports the results of a series of studies in which the construction and validation of a behavioral measure of authoritarianism is reported. Factor analysis of already established behavioral scales (e,g., Ray's (1976) Directiveness scale; the Buss-Durkee (1957) Hostility inventory, etc.) and items especially written for the study resulted in a Revised F scale with a reliability (Cronbach's alpha) of .79 and a rpN of -.45. The items loaded significantly on four factors, namely, Dominance/Leadership, Achievement motivation. Interpersonal conflict and Verbal hostility. Furthermore, validity studies revealed the scale to possess satisfactory validity. It is suggested that this measure be seriously considered as an alternative indicator of levels of authoritarianism.     

Authoritarianism of the left revisited

Eysenck and Shils observed that in political life authoritarianism seems roughly equally likely on the political Left and Right. There have however been difficulties in measuring authoritarianism of the Left. The Ray Humanistic Radicalism (HR) scale expresses classically liberal and humanist sentiments and yet has shown high positive correlations with the Adorno Fascism (F) and Dogmatism (D) scales. It appears to show that liberalism can be Fascist. The correlations could be however be an acquiescence artefact. The HR Scale was therefore administered to a random sample of 99 Australians together with a balanced F scale (BF scale). Scores on the BF scale did thus have acquiescence experimentally controlled against. The positive F-scale items were again found to correlate positively with the HR scale but the BF scale as a whole showed no significant correlation. As Eysenck predicted then, social attitudes were found to be two-dimensional, with liberalism orthogonal to authoritarianism rather than opposed to it. It was quite possible for people to accept the liberal sentiments of the HR scale and the aggressive sentiments of the F scale simultaneously.     

Explaining Conservative Beliefs and Political Preferences: A Comparison of Social Dominance Orientation and Authoritarianism

The present study compares the predictive validity of the Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) scale and various measures of authoritarianism, conservative beliefs, and political preferences. In accordance with previous studies, SDO and authoritarianism independently predicted conservative beliefs. Political preferences and extreme right-wing voting was best predicted by SDO. Unlike previous research, high positive correlations between SDO and the various authoritarianism scales were found. The relationship between SDO and authoritarianism is discussed.     

Finding the Loch Ness Monster: Left‐Wing Authoritarianism in the United States

Although past research suggests authoritarianism may be a uniquely right‐wing phenomenon, the present two studies tested the hypothesis that authoritarianism exists in both right‐wing and left‐wing contexts in essentially equal degrees. Across two studies, university (n = 475) and Mechanical Turk (n = 298) participants completed either the RWA (right‐wing authoritarianism) scale or a newly developed (and parallel) LWA (left‐wing authoritarianism) scale. Participants further completed measurements of ideology and three domain‐specific scales: prejudice, dogmatism, and attitude strength. Findings from both studies lend support to an authoritarianism symmetry hypothesis: Significant positive correlations emerged between LWA and measurements of liberalism, prejudice, dogmatism, and attitude strength. These results largely paralleled those correlating RWA with identical conservative‐focused measurements, and an overall effect‐size measurement showed LWA was similarly related to those constructs (compared to RWA) in both Study 1 and Study 2. Taken together, these studies provide evidence that LWA may be a viable construct in ordinary U.S. samples.     

Authoritarianism,child-rearing practices and ethnocentrism in seven Pacific Islands groups

Data were collected from seven cultural groups in the South Pacific in order to examine the relationship between authoritarian child-rearing practices and ethnocentrism. An analysis of the data within each cultural group showed that there were inter-cultural differences in the structure of child-rearing pratices. In particular authoritarianism scales were obtained in the Tahitian, Cook Islands and Samoan groups and these scales were significantly correlated with measures of ethnocentrism. Scales which were close variants of authoritarianism were obtained in the Tongan and Fiji-Indian groups and these scales were also significantly correlated with ethnocentrism. The scales obtained in the Fijian and New Hebrides groups, however, did not appear to be closely related to authoritarianism and these two groups showed less inter-individual variation than the other cultural groups.     

Authoritarianism,Religious Fundamentalism,Quest, and Prejudice

Five studies of university students and their parents were carried out to investigate the relationships among right-wing authoritarianism, various indices of religious orientation, and prejudice. Measures of religious fundamentalism, and religious quest, developed for this research, proved to be psychometrically sound, and were good discriminators between prejudiced and unprejudiced persons, across a variety of different measures of prejudice and authoritarian aggression. Scores on both Religious Fundamentalism and Religious Quest scales also were correlated strongly with right-wing authoritarianism and the Christian Orthodoxy scale, although orthodoxy itself tended not to be correlated with prejudice. Apparently, religious fundamentalism and nonquesting are linked with authoritarianism and prejudice toward a wide variety of minority groups. Possible explanations for these relationships are discussed.     

Differentiating Islamophobia: Introducing a New Scale to Measure Islamoprejudice and Secular Islam Critique

Since 2001 there has been a steadily increasing awareness of discrimination against Muslims based on their religion. Despite the widespread use of the neologism Islamophobia to refer to this phenomenon, this term has been harshly criticized for confounding prejudiced views of Muslims with a legitimate critique of Muslim practices based on secular grounds. In the current research a scale was developed to differentiate Islamoprejudice (based on the influential Islamophobia definition of the British Runnymede Trust) and Secular Critique of Islam. Across two studies, Islamoprejudice was related to explicit and implicit prejudice, right‐wing authoritarianism, and social dominance orientation whereas Secular Critique was unrelated to any forms of prejudice but negatively related to religiosity and authoritarianism. The two scales were mostly independent or only moderately related. Importantly, the new Islamoprejudice scale outperformed all other scales in predicting actual opposition versus support for a heatedly debated, newly built mosque. These results demonstrate the necessity to differentiate between Islamoprejudice and Secular Critique in future research on attitudes towards Islam.     

主管威权领导与下属前瞻行为：一个被中介的调节模型构建与检验

采用214份主管-下属配对调查数据, 考察了威权领导这一华人企业组织中特有的领导方式对下属前瞻行为的影响, 尤其是检验了下属对领导者信任的中介作用与权威主义和集体主义这两种传统价值取向的调节作用。层次回归分析结果表明：(1)威权领导与下属的前瞻行为呈显著负相关; (2)对领导者的信任在威权领导与下属前瞻行为之间起完全中介作用; (3)下属权威主义取向对威权领导与下属对领导者信任和前瞻行为之间的负向关系均具有显著的弱化效应, 并且下属对领导者的信任完全中介了威权领导与下属权威主义取向之间的交互作用对前瞻行为的影响; (4)下属集体主义取向对威权领导与下属对领导者的信任之间的负向关系具有显著的增强效应。     

Race Prejudice and Economic Beliefs

Abstract

Following Yinger's assertion that the association between racism and personality variables is “exaggerated” and Heaven's findings that in South Africa white racism is associated with specific attitudes toward economic issues, the present study investigated the relationship between British race prejudice and economic beliefs. A British sample (N = 72) was administered an Attitudes toward West Indians scale, various personality and attitudinal measures, as well as an economic locus of control scale. Results showed racism to be significantly related to authoritarianism and the external/denial subscale of that scale. Further step-wise regression analysis showed scores on the authoritarian attitudes scale and the external/denial subscale to be significant predictors of prejudice.     

A bias-corrected exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of right-wing authoritarianism: Support for a three-factor structure

The factor structure of right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) remains a contentious issue. Although designed to measure three underlying attitude clusters, aggression, submission and conventionalism, many items are deliberately double- or triple-barrelled, to capture the covariation of the three clusters in a unidimensional scale. Additionally, although the scale is balanced, there is an item wording direction bias in the clusters; aggression items are pro-trait, and conventionalism items are con-trait. Sub-scale structure is therefore potentially confounded with acquiescence bias. Although RWA as a unitary construct has been an effective tool for exploring prejudice, it would be useful in many cases to measure its underlying components directly. Proposed solutions to this problem include creating short-form scales as subsets of the original scale, or modifying items to simplify and un-confound the structure. We present convergent evidence of an underlying factor structure by considering one-, two- and three-factor solutions to the uncorrected scale and then using an indirect method to correct for acquiescence bias. Before and after correction, factor analysis supported a three-factor solution. Confirmatory factor analyses also support a three-factor solution compared to a one-factor solution.     

组织心理所有权的前因与后果：基于“人-境互动”的视角

采用问卷调查法, 以广东地区电信企业的216名员工为研究对象, 考察了组织心理所有权的影响因素与影响效果。研究结果表明：(1)威权领导与员工的组织心理所有权呈显著负相关, 并且对员工集体主义倾向与其组织心理所有权之间的关系具有显著的调节作用：在领导者高威权作风的情况下, 集体主义倾向与组织心理所有权之间并无显著相关性; 在领导者低威权作风的情况下, 集体主义倾向与组织心理所有权之间存在显著正相关。(2)上下级关系显著调节员工的组织心理所有权与其沉默行为之间的关系。当上下级关系较强时, 组织心理所有权与沉默行为之间存在显著负相关; 当上下级关系较弱时, 组织心理所有权与沉默行为之间并无显著相关性。     

Collective Rights and Personal Freedoms: A Discursive Analysis of Participant Accounts of Authoritarianism

This article presents a discursive analysis of participant accounts of authoritarianism, with the aim of understanding how participants construct accounts about authority, when, and for what purposes. Participants completed a 30‐item Right‐Wing Authoritarianism scale and were then interviewed about how they went about this task. Analyses revealed that, despite an overall consistency when answering items on an authoritarianism scale, participants in this study did not consistently choose to produce authoritarian responses in contrast to the nonauthoritarian alternative. Instead, the construction and expression of authoritarian ideas was found to be directly related to two rhetorical features of conversing about authoritarianism: (1) the ideological dilemma of society versus individual and (2) the mobilization of arguments about social and personal threat that allowed participants to construct accounts about collective rights or personal freedoms. These findings are discussed in terms of their implications for current debates about how authoritarianism should be theorized and studied.     

On perceived conflicts between religion and science: the role of fundamentalism and right-wing authoritarianism

Volunteers from fundamentalist churches and a Psychology of Religion class (N = 77) completed Altemeyer and Hunsberger's 1992 Fundamentalism Scale, Altemeyer's 1988 Right-wing Authoritarianism Scale, and answered questions about science, religion, and their relationship. Scores on the scales were highly positively correlated. Neither orientation correlated with seeing science as improving life, and both correlated with being troubled by newer developments in science such as organ transplants or genetic engineering. Partial correlations showed that both orientations favored religious beliefs over scientific data when there was a perceived conflict. Three subscales of right-wing authoritarianism clarified how authoritarianism correlated with other measures, thereby supporting a multidimensional conceptualization of right-wing authoritarianism.     

A factorial study of a new measure of authoritarianism

In the present study scores on Ray's Directiveness scale were subjected to Varimax rotation. Three factors explaining more than 50% of the variance of authoritarianism were interpreted and labelled Submissiveness, Dominance and Aggressiveness, respectively. Although these are in line with Ray's earlier conception of the nature of authoritarianism and do, to some extent, support other findings, it is suggested that the Directiveness scale be expanded to accommodate more characteristics of authoritarianism such as rigidity, hostility and superstitiousness.