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.     

On Being a Mindful Authoritarian: Is Need for Cognition Always Associated with Less Punitiveness?

Previous research shows that the motivation to be mindful is associated with less intolerance toward deviant and stigmatized groups. The present research examines authoritarianism as a possible moderator of this seemingly robust finding. We obtained consistent evidence from two studies that authoritarianism (right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation) moderates the relationship between need for cognition and punitiveness. Among low authoritarians, need for cognition was negatively associated with punitiveness and dispositional attribution of crimes and positively associated with support for rehabilitation of criminals. However, among high authoritarians, the pattern reversed. These results are discussed in the context of some recent advances in the understanding of motivated social cognition.     

Authoritarian Disbeliefs in Diversity

Ethnic diversity poses a threat to authoritarians, as it indicates non-conformism to group norms and poses a threat to group conformity. According to authoritarian dynamic theory, threats elicit authoritarian reactions in people with authoritarian predispositions. In the present article we tested a mediation model derived from authoritarian dynamic theory in a sample of 171 students. As expected, authoritarian predisposition negatively predicted diversity beliefs. This effect was fully mediated by an authoritarian manifestation, that is, authoritarian aggression. The two other components of right-wing authoritarianism, authoritarian submission and conventionalism, did not mediate the effect. Results confirm contemporary research on authoritarianism and the differentiation of authoritarian predispositions and its manifestations.     

Integrating values and cognitive style in a model of right-wing radicalism

Research has shown that multi-factorial models of ideology not only account for political orientation but also highlight its core aspects (Feldman & Johnston, 2014). Recently, Montuori (2005) argued that reasoning according to a “logic of disjunction that creates binary opposition” exacerbates what is termed the “totalitarian mindset” (p. 26). In this study we examined this hypothesis by testing a model in which a disjunctive binary logic mediates values and proxies for right-wing radicalism. Methods: 425 participants completed a survey on political orientation that included measures of social dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism. Personal values, egalitarianism, and beliefs in a free society were also assessed as they are motives typically associated with ideology. Lastly, we assessed disjunctive logic based on a scale derived from a comprehensive study of ambiguity intolerance markers. Results: A structural equation model in which beliefs in free society, egalitarianism, security, universalism and traditionalism predicted right-wing radicalism was tested with or without interposing a disjunctive logic factor. Our findings show that disjunctive logic played a major role in predicting behaviors associated with right-wing radicalism.     

Can Ethical Ideologies Predict Prejudice?

Idealism and relativism were designed to assess different ethical ideological views. Their relation with attitudes toward a variety of outgroups has not been previously studied. Understanding how concerns over ethical principles and consequences are related to prejudiced attitudes could provide some insight into these constructs and into the nature of prejudice. In two studies totaling 311 participants, participants completed measures on ethical ideologies, right-wing authoritarianism, and attitudes toward various outgroups. The differential predictive validities of ethical ideologies, in comparison to right-wing authoritarianism, on prejudicial attitudes toward dangerous, derogated, and dissident outgroup members were examined. We found that both idealism and relativism contributed to predicting attitudes regarding outgroup members, over and above right-wing authoritarianism. As such, people’s personal moral standards and code of conduct for dealing with interpersonal problems and transgressions can partly explain their negative attitudes toward outgroup members. More research is required to determine the unique influence of ethical ideologies over other constructs previously shown to predict prejudice.     

"Proud of violence". Psychoanalytic remarks on adolescence and right extremism]

Young people with extremist right-wing leanings who join together to form gangs frequently come from a social background which has had a traumatic influence on their biographies from an early stage. The right-wing radical group functions as a substitute for caring parents and other figures that these youngsters can look up to. Within these constellations they then act out the violence that they themselves have been the victims of. The author points out that, both on an individual and social plane, these young people stand for facets of our own selves that we have severed off or negated and conflicts which we have yet to come to terms with.     

Environmental and Family Associations With Racism1

Environmental and family factors related to racism in college students were investigated. Students (N=114) at a southern liberal‐arts college filled out an extensive survey about childhood activities and family of origin, and 40 of their mothers completed a similar survey. The Attitudes Toward Blacks ( Brigham, 1993 ) scale measured racism. Several hypotheses were supported. Students who exhibited less racism also reported that they made more diverse friends in school, came from a more diverse hometown, had diverse encounters and friendships at an earlier age, and had more positive foreign travel experiences. In addition, more racist students perceived their mothers as being more prejudiced while they were growing up, and they perceived their fathers as being more prejudiced currently. Finally, students judged their mothers as less racist than their fathers, and also reported that their mothers exhibited less racist behaviors than did their fathers. The importance of racially diverse experiences and friendships early in life are discussed as means to decrease racism.     

The “Making and Unmaking” of Prejudice Against Australian Muslims and Gay Men and Lesbians: The Role of Religious Development and Fundamentalism

Despite the growing international interest in the relation between religion and prejudice, there has been a dearth of studies conducted within Australia. We used the Faith Development Scale (FDS) to examine the relation between religious maturity and attitudes toward Muslims and toward gay men and lesbians in an Australian context using a sample of churchgoers from the Perth metropolitan area (N = 139). Respondents who scored lower on the FDS were more prejudiced toward both target groups than were high scorers. Furthermore, participants who scored lower on the FDS were more prejudiced against gay men and lesbians than they were against Muslim Australians. The FDS was a better predictor of attitudes toward the two groups than was the Quest Scale. Contrary to overseas studies, we found that religious fundamentalists held more prejudiced attitudes toward gay men and lesbians than toward those of a different religion (Australian Muslims). Right-wing political orientation was also found to be predictive of prejudice against Australian Muslims and against gay men and lesbians independently of religious development. Results suggest that religious maturity, as well as fundamentalism and right-wing political views, plays an important role in the “making” or “unmaking” of prejudice against Australian Muslims and against gay men and lesbians. Evidence is presented that suggests that the Quest Scale and the FDS are measuring different aspects of religious development.     

ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIOR TOWARD HUMAN RIGHTS ACROSS DIFFERENT CONTEXTS: THE ROLE OF RIGHT-WING AUTHORITARIANISM,POLITICAL IDEOLOGY,AND RELIGIOSITY*

Three studies were carried out to examine attitudes and behavior toward human rights. ‘Universal’ human rights implies that there should be cross-situational consistency in attitudes and behavior toward human rights. An alternative interpretation is that attitudes and behavior toward human rights may shift across contexts, as a function of ideology. We reasoned that Canadian subjects would be more critical of the human rights records of Soviet and the Third World societies, and thus show stronger support for human rights in these than in Canadian society. Hypothesis two predicted that right-wing political ideology and support for human rights would be negatively correlated in contexts Canada and Third World, but not in the Soviet context; hypothesis three predicted the same pattern of associations between religiosity and support for human rights. Hypothesis four predicted that authoritarians, because of their fundamental opposition to individual liberties, would oppose human rights in all contexts. Study 1 involved 155 students expressing attitudes toward a range of human rights issues. Study 2 involved 74 Pro-Life supporters expressing attitudes on human rights, as well as on abortion. Study 3 involved a behavioral measure of support for human rights among 450 students. The findings generally supported hypotheses one and four, and provided some support for hypotheses two and three. The results seem to provide further evidence of an association between ideology and moral reasoning.     

Authoritarianism and recall of evidence about criminal behavior

Research by Marshall (1966) suggested that high authoritarian persons might be more accurate at recalling evidence about criminal behavior than low authoritarian persons. Drawing on other research findings, Marshall's hypothesis was expanded to predict that high authoritarians would recall more about evidence relating to defendant character and low authoritarians would recall more about situational evidence. In two jury-simulation experiments the new hypothesis was confirmed.     

In Defense of Mainstream Conservatism: A Response to Crouse and Stalker

This article provides a response to Crouse and Stalker's reply to my commentary (Thomas, 2013) on their article titled “Do Right‐Wing Authoritarian Beliefs Originate from Psychological Conflict?” (Psychoanalytic Psychology, 24, 25–44). The authors' critical remarks regarding my commentary are addressed, and recommendations are offered for a more cautious use of psychoanalytic theory and results derived from The Right‐Wing Authoritarianism Scale (Altemeyer, 1998) for labeling persons with mainstream conservative political beliefs as being “psychopathological” or “right‐wing authoritarians.” Such assertions regarding the personality characteristics of political conservatives are particularly troubling, since the authors' conclusions were purely speculative, and they collected neither clinical nor empirical data on patients or research subjects with so‐called right‐wing authoritarian personalities to support their speculations.     

When authoritarianism meets religion: Sacrificing others in the name of abstract deontology

Authoritarianism is a stable construct in terms of individual differences (social attitudes based on personality and values), but its manifestations and behavioral outcomes may depend on contextual factors. In the present experiment, we investigated whether authoritarianism is sensitive to religious influences in predicting rigid morality. Specifically, we investigated whether authoritarians, after supraliminal religious priming, would show, in hypothetical moral dilemmas, preference for impersonal societal norms even at the detriment of interpersonal, care‐based prosociality toward proximal persons and acquaintances in need. The results confirmed the expectations, with a small effect size for the religious priming × authoritarianism interaction. In addition, these results were specific to participants' authoritarianism and not to their individual religiosity. The interaction between authoritarian dispositions and religious ideas may constitute a powerful combination leading to behaviors that are detrimental for the well‐being and the life of others, even proximal people, in the name of abstract deontology. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Juror decision making: A case of attitude change mediated by authoritarianism

For a jury to reach a unanimous decision, certain individuals must change their attitudes with regard to the defendant's guilt during deliberations. Because these changers are the key to the group decision-making process, they were carefully scrutinized to ascertain demographic or personality characteristics which might be mediating their behavior. In three experiments, two using college students as subjects and one using Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas jury pool members, it was found that authoritarians changed their attitude with regard to the defendant's guilt more than equalitarians. Further, most of these “changers” were aware they had changed their attitude. There was no generalizable evidence for the proposition that authoritarians are more likely to favor a guilty verdict.     

Authoritarianism and interpersonal spacing behavior

When the relationship between interpersonal distance and authoritarianism was examined by Frankel and Barrett (1971), they failed to mention that their main effect for authoritarianism was not significant. Adorno et al. (1950), however, claim that authoritarians like greater interpersonal space. As the measure of authoritarianism concerned (the F scale) has been shown to be largely a measure of conservatism, any relationship observed could have wide applicability. Methodological weaknesses in the Frankel and Barrett paper are noted and a further experiment with 25 student Ss is reported. Correlations of 0.41 and 0.43 between F-scale score and distance adopted from two target persons (confederates) were found. Extensive controls for possibly confounding variables did not alter this result by any more than a minor amount.     

Authoritarianism and Political Impoverishment: Deficits in Knowledge and Civic Disinterest

Past research shows that authoritarian individuals hold strong opinions about a variety of political and social issues, such as race relations and military conflict. What has not been established, though, is the amount of general political knowledge that authoritarians possess. In this study, three groups of college students were administered Altemeyer's Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) scale; most of them also received items assessing general political knowledge and specific knowledge about the 2000 presidential election, as well as items assessing interest in politics. Relative to students with low RWA scores, those with high scores possessed less political knowledge; moreover, they expressed less interest in learning about politics. In general, authoritarianism was unrelated to how individuals got their political information or how credible they found their sources. The implication that authoritarians hold strong attitudinal beliefs with weak political knowledge is discussed.     

The interplay of individual differences,norms, and group identification in predicting prejudiced behavior in online video game interactions

Despite the increasing popularity of video games and the diversity of people who play, prejudice remains common in online gaming. In the current study, we use structural equation modeling to test the role of social norms, individual differences, and gamer identification as predictors of how likely someone is to report engaging in prejudiced behavior while playing online video games. We also test the relative importance of these predictors to assess how likely people are to confront prejudice when it occurs in online video games. Participants (N = 384) completed a series of questionnaires to assess their attitudes and perceptions of online gaming norms, as well as to report their own prejudiced and confrontation behavior in video games. We found that both social norms and individual differences are significant predictors of behavior in online gaming. The more normative people report prejudice to be, the more they report making prejudiced comments. Similarly, the more normative confrontation of prejudice is reported to be, the more likely people are to report confronting prejudice. The more people endorsed generally prejudiced attitudes, the more likely they were to report making prejudiced remakes in online gaming and the less likely they were to report confronting prejudiced remarks. These results provide a foundation to inform interventions to reduce prejudice in gaming and indicate that both individual differences and norms are important to consider when designing interventions.     

In-Group/Out-Group Bias as a Function of Differential Contact and Authoritarian Personality

Abstract

The subjects, volunteers of both sexes who signed up for intermediate-level ski lessons at a large New England ski resort, were randomly assigned to a blue or a green subgroup after having filled out a shortened version of the California F (Fascism) scale (Adorno, Frenkel-Brunswik, Levinson, & Sanford, 1950). Each of 18 sessions was randomly assigned to one of three in-group/out-group conditions: anticipated, moderate, or maximum differential contact. Following these sessions, each subject rated the performance of the other subjects, both blue and green, who participated in that session. Low authoritarians demonstrated no in-group/out-group rating bias in any condition. High authoritarians enhanced the in-group and disparaged the out-group relative to low authoritarians, showing an in-group/out-group bias in all three conditions that increased as a function of differential contact.     

Virtual prejudice

According to recent theorizing in social psychology, social behavior is controlled not only by reflective, but also by impulsive systems. The latter are based on associative links that may influence behavior without intent. The current study examined how prejudiced implicit associations affect physiological and automatic behavioral responses. Our native Dutch participants were immersed in a virtual environment in which they encountered virtual persons (avatars) with either White or Moroccan facial features. In line with our predictions, participants maintained more distance and showed an increase in skin conductance level when approaching Moroccan avatars as opposed to White avatars. Participants’ implicit negative associations with Moroccans moderated both effects. Moreover, evidence was found that the relation between implicit prejudice and distance effects was fully mediated by skin conductance level effects. These data demonstrate how prejudiced implicit associations may unintentionally lead to impulsive discriminatory responses.     

PREFERRING "HOUSEWIVES" TO "FEMINISTS"

Four studies are described outlining the favorability of attitudes toward women. In Study 1, participants indicated their attitudes toward women and men and their construal of the term "women". The results revealed that women were evaluated more favorably than men, but that male right-wing authoritarians (RWAs) who construed women as referring primarily to feminists were least favorable in their attitudes. In Study 2, participants indicated their attitudes toward both "housewives" and "feminists". The results revealed that feminists were evaluated less favorably than housewives, and that the most negative attitudes toward feminists were expressed by authoritarian men. Study 3 revealed that high-RWA males held more negative symbolic beliefs concerning feminists (i.e., beliefs that feminists failed to promote participants'values) and that these beliefs accounted for variation in attitudes among high RWAs and much of the RWA-attitude relation. Finally, Study 4 revealed that high RWAs perceived greater value dissimilarity between them-selves and feminists. The implications of the findings for future research are discussed.     

Thanks for asking: Self-affirming questions reduce backlash when stigmatized targets confront prejudice

Two experiments tested the prediction that stigmatized individuals can avoid backlash when they confront others about bias if they first ask questions designed to activate self-affirmation processes. Experiment 1 showed that compared to a no-strategy control condition, highly prejudiced perceivers tended to express less desire to meet an Arab-American when he asked them to take his perspective on prejudice, but they expressed more desire to meet him when he asked self-affirming questions prior to making the perspective-taking request. Experiment 2 replicated this effect with a different affirmation and revealed that asking self-affirming questions reduced perceptions that the target was being confrontational when asking others to take his perspective. Together, these studies show that stigmatized targets can effectively challenge prejudiced individuals to reduce their biases if they first use a subtle strategy that reduces defensiveness.