A Motivational Model of Authoritarianism: Integrating Personal and Situational Determinants

We describe and test a collective security model of authoritarianism. This model sees Right Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) as directly caused by collective security motivation (CSM), which is in turn influenced jointly by personality (with its effects mediated through group identification and dangerous world beliefs) and social threat (with its effects mediated through dangerous world beliefs). Two studies tested this model using student samples—one was correlational ( N =  218), while the other included an experimental manipulation of threat using future scenarios ( N =  136). Structural equation analyses partially supported the model suggesting that CSM fully mediated the effects of threat and group identification on RWA, but only partially mediated the effect of personality, which also had important direct effects.     

Differential effects of intergroup contact for authoritarians and social dominators: a dual process model perspective

Intergroup contact is among the most effective ways to improve intergroup attitudes. Research examining whether the effects of contact are contingent on individual differences is limited, however. The authors test a dual process model perspective of individual differences in contact and prejudice. Their model predicts that intergroup contact should be particularly effective for people high in right-wing authoritarianism, but not those high in social dominance orientation, because these ideological attitudes are driven by different underlying motivational goals. The authors confirm these hypotheses in longitudinal (N = 805) and cross-sectional (N = 1,343) national probability samples. They also isolate perceived social threat, but not competitive threat, as a mediator for the interaction of right-wing authoritarianism and contact on prejudice. The authors elaborate on the individual difference mechanisms that facilitate and inhibit the effects of intergroup contact on prejudice and discuss how these relations may depend on contextual factors and the varying functions of prejudice.     

Interpersonal disgust, ideological orientations, and dehumanization as predictors of intergroup attitudes

Disgust is a basic emotion characterized by revulsion and rejection, yet it is relatively unexamined in the literature on prejudice. In the present investigation, interpersonal-disgust sensitivity (e.g., not wanting to wear clean used clothes or to sit on a warm seat vacated by a stranger) in particular predicted negative attitudes toward immigrants, foreigners, and socially deviant groups, even after controlling for concerns with contracting disease. The mechanisms underlying the link between interpersonal disgust and attitudes toward immigrants were explored using a path model. As predicted, the effect of interpersonal-disgust sensitivity on group attitudes was indirect, mediated by ideological orientations (social dominance orientation, right-wing authoritarianism) and dehumanizing perceptions of the out-group. The effects of social dominance orientation on group attitudes were both direct and indirect, via dehumanization. These results establish a link between disgust sensitivity and prejudice that is not accounted for by fear of infection, but rather is mediated by ideological orientations and dehumanizing group representations. Implications for understanding and reducing prejudice are discussed.     

Personality, ideology, prejudice, and politics: a dual-process motivational model

Early theorists assumed that sociopolitical or ideological attitudes were organized along a single left-right dimension and directly expressed a basic personality dimension. Empirical findings, however, did not support this and suggested that there seem to be 2 distinct ideological attitude dimensions, best captured by the constructs of right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation, which express 2 distinct sets of motivational goals or values. We outline a dual-process motivational (DPM) model of how these 2 dimensions originate from particular personality dispositions and socialized worldview beliefs and how and why their different underlying motivational goals or values generate their wide-ranging effects on social outcomes, such as prejudice and politics. We then review new research bearing on the model and conclude by noting promising directions for future research.     

The role of “dark personalities” (narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy), Big Five personality factors, and ideology in explaining prejudice

The so-called Dark Triad (narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy) represent correlated subclinical personality traits capturing “dark personalities”. How might darker personalities contribute to prejudice? In the present study (n = 197), these dark personality variables correlated positively with outgroup threat perceptions and anti-immigrant prejudice. A proposed two-stage structural equation model, assuming indirect personality effects (Dark Personality, Big Five) on prejudice through ideology and group threat perceptions, fit the data well. Specifically, a latent Dark Personality factor predicted social dominance orientation, whereas (low) Openness to Experience predicted right-wing authoritarianism; these ideological variables each predicted prejudice directly and indirectly through heightened intergroup threat. The authors recommend that personality models of prejudice incorporate both normal-range and subclinical personality predictors, in addition to ideological and social psychological mediators.     

Perceived Threat and Authoritarianism

There has been a long history of work on authoritarianism that has looked at the role of societal threat. Much of the empirical research in this tradition has relied on aggregate data to examine the relationship between societal threat and authoritarian attitudes and behaviors. Our analysis uses individual-level data and a range of perceived threat measures to better understand the dynamics of authoritarianism and threat. We also move beyond the hypothesis of a direct relationship between threat and authoritarianism, and hypothesize instead that the relationship involves interaction effects: societal threat activates authoritarian predispositions. As predicted, our analysis finds no evidence of a direct effect of societal threat but significant evidence of an interaction between authoritarian predispositions and perceived threat. We consider the implications of these results for our understanding of authoritarianism.     

The psychological bases of ideology and prejudice: testing a dual process model

The issue of personality and prejudice has been largely investigated in terms of authoritarianism and social dominance orientation. However, these seem more appropriately conceptualized as ideological attitudes than as personality dimensions. The authors describe a causal model linking dual dimensions of personality, social world view, ideological attitudes, and intergroup attitudes. Structural equation modeling with data from American and White Afrikaner students supported the model, suggesting that social conformity and belief in a dangerous world influence authoritarian attitudes, whereas toughmindedness and belief in a competitive jungle world influence social dominance attitudes, and these two ideological attitude dimensions influence intergroup attitudes. The model implies that dual motivational and cognitive processes, which may be activated by different kinds of situational and intergroup dynamics, may underlie 2 distinct dimensions of prejudice.     

Support for Anti‐Muslim Policies: The Role of Political Traits and Threat Perception

We explored how political beliefs and attitudes predict support for anti‐Muslim policies and extremist behavior in the United States following the 2015 Paris terrorist attacks. A large sample completed measures of authoritarianism, social dominance orientation (SDO), generalized prejudice, identification with all humanity (IWAH), perceptions of Muslim threat, and support for anti‐Muslim policies and behaviors. These measures accounted for 73% of the variance in moderate anti‐Muslim policies and 55% of the variance in extreme anti‐Muslim policies. Authoritarianism and SDO directly and indirectly predicted support for anti‐Muslim policies, with their effects partially mediated by generalized prejudice, IWAH, and perceptions of Muslims as threatening. Threat both mediated and moderated the relationship between authoritarianism and anti‐Muslim policies. A negative interaction between authoritarianism and perceptions of Muslims as threatening predicted moderate anti‐Muslim policies, but a positive interaction predicted extreme anti‐Muslim policies. A tentative explanation is offered. Perceptions of Muslim threat was consistently a powerful predictor of anti‐Muslim policies and willingness to engage in extremist behaviors targeting Muslims. Programs to combat anti‐Muslim prejudice should consider the role of threat‐related stereotypes in expressions of anti‐Muslim prejudice.     

Authoritarian reactions to terrorist threat: Who is being threatened,the Me or the We?

Endorsement of authoritarian attitudes has been observed to increase under conditions of terrorist threat. However, it is not clear whether this effect is a genuine response to perceptions of personal or collective threat. We investigated this question in two experiments using German samples. In the first experiment (N = 144), both general and specific authoritarian tendencies increased after asking people to imagine that they were personally affected by terrorism. No such effect occurred when they were made to think about Germany as a whole being affected by terrorism. This finding was replicated and extended in a second experiment (N = 99), in which personal and collective threat were manipulated orthogonally. Authoritarian and ethnocentric (ingroup bias) reactions occurred only for people highly identified with their national ingroup under personal threat, indicating that authoritarian responses may operate as a group‐level coping strategy for a threat to the personal self. Again, we found no effects for collective threat. In both studies, authoritarianism mediated the effects of personal threat on more specific authoritarian and ethnocentric reactions. These results suggest that the effects of terrorist threat on authoritarianism can, at least in part, be attributed to a sense of personal insecurity, raised under conditions of terrorist threat. We discuss the present findings with regard to basic sociomotivational processes (e.g., group‐based control restoration, terror management) and how these may relate to recent models of authoritarianism.     

Keeping the vermin out: Perceived disease threat and ideological orientations as predictors of exclusionary immigration attitudes

Integrating evolutionary and social representations theories, the current study examines the relationship between perceived disease threat and exclusionary immigration attitudes in the context of a potential avian influenza pandemic. This large‐scale disease provides a realistic context for investigating the link between disease threat and immigration attitudes. The main aim of this cross‐sectional study (N = 412) was to explore mechanisms through which perceived chronic and contextual disease threats operate on immigration attitudes. Structural equation models show that the relationship between chronic disease threat (germ aversion) and exclusionary immigration attitudes (assimilationist immigration criteria, health‐based immigration criteria and desire to reduce the proportion of foreigners) was mediated by ideological and normative beliefs (social dominance orientation, belief in a dangerous world), but not by contextual disease threat (appraisal of avian influenza pandemic threat). Contextual disease threat only predicted support for health‐based immigration criteria. The conditions under which real‐life disease threats influence intergroup attitudes are scrutinized. Convergence and dissimilarity of evolutionary and social representational approaches in accounting for the link between disease threat and immigration attitudes are discussed. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

社会认同与内、外群体态度的关系：群际威胁和群体情绪的中介作用

为探究社会认同、群际威胁和群体情绪如何同时影响内、外群体态度,本研究以中日撞船事件为考察蓝本向天津市431名大学生被试进行调查研究,结果发现：国家认同在认同威胁对两种群体态度的总影响和通过群体愤怒的间接影响中都起到负向的调节作用;群际威胁和群体情绪在社会认同与内、外群体态度之间具有显著中介作用。结论：国家认同在对群体态度的影响中起基础性作用,不同群际威胁与不同群体情绪相对应进而影响群体态度。     

The impact of fear appeals on processing and acceptance of action recommendations

A stage model of processing of fear-arousing communications was tested in an experiment that examined the impact of vulnerability to a severe health risk, the quality of the arguments supporting a protective action recommendation, and the source to which the recommendation was attributed, on processing and acceptance of the recommendation. Argument quality influenced attitudes toward the recommendation (but not intention to act), and this effect was mediated by negative thoughts about the recommendation. Vulnerability influenced intention to act (but not attitudes), and this effect was mediated by perceived threat and positive thoughts about the recommendation. The pattern of findings suggests that although vulnerability to a severe health risk induces biased processing of the recommendation, biased processing is restricted to intentions and does not compromise the evaluation of the recommendation. The theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.     

Attachment theory and intergroup bias: evidence that priming the secure base schema attenuates negative reactions to out-groups

Five studies examined the effects of priming the secure base schema on intergroup bias. In addition, Studies 1-2 examined the effects of dispositional attachment style, Studies 2-5 examined a mood interpretation, Study 3 examined the mediating role of threat appraisal, and Studies 4-5 examined the effects of secure base priming while inducing a threat to self-esteem or cultural worldview. Secure base priming led to less negative evaluative reactions toward out-groups than positive affect and neutral control conditions. In addition, whereas the effects of secure base priming did not depend on attachment style and were not explained by mood induction, they were mediated by threat appraisal and occurred even when self-esteem or cultural worldview was threatened. The discussion emphasizes the relevance of attachment theory for understanding intergroup attitudes.     

Personality and support for universal human rights: a review and test of a structural model

All individual differences that predict support for international human rights are first reviewed: support for human rights is linked most positively to "globalism" (other international and environmental concerns), "identification with all humanity," principled moral reasoning, benevolence, and dispositional empathy. It is related most negatively to ethnocentrism and its root dispositions, the social dominance orientation, and authoritarianism. Other correlates are also noted. Secondly, a structural model of the effects of authoritarianism, social dominance, ethnocentrism and identification with all humanity upon commitment to human rights is presented and tested. Across 2 studies (Study 1, N=218 nonstudent adults; Study 2, N=102 university students), ethnocentrism and identification with all humanity directly predicted human rights commitment. The effects of authoritarianism upon this commitment were fully mediated through enhanced ethnocentrism and reduced identification with all humanity. The effects of social dominance were similar, but its direct effect upon human rights commitment remained significant and was not, in the second study, mediated by reduced dispositional empathy.     

Right-Wing Ideology as a Predictor of Collective Action: A Test Across Four Political Issue Domains

Despite a vast literature documenting motivations for collective action, the role of sociopolitical ideologies, including right-wing ideologies, in predicting collective action is underresearched. Literature on right-wing ideological beliefs suggests that those higher in right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) or social dominance orientation (SDO) hold specific attitudes or endorse specific policies, in part, because of factors such as perceived fear-based threat or empathy. In the present research, structural equation modeling (SEM) was run on pooled data from a diverse Canadian university sample and two American adult samples (total N = 1,469). Participants completed measures of RWA, SDO, fear-based threat, empathy, and domain-specific collective action. Results showed that RWA and SDO both related positively to collective action targeting societal moral breakdown but negatively to collective action aimed at equalizing race relations or fighting climate change. Whereas the indirect effects of right-wing ideologies via fear-based threat or empathy were significant in all four domains for SDO, the indirect effect of RWA was only significant in the climate change domain. Implications are discussed.     

Threat and authoritarianism in the United States, 1978-1987

Studies at both the individual and collective levels have implicated threat as an important factor in authoritarianism. As a follow-up to Sales's (1973) study relating behavioral indicators of authoritarianism to levels of social threat, the present research analyzed archival data from the United States for high-threat (1978-1982) and low-threat (1983-1987) periods. Societal measures of most attitude and behavioral components of the authoritarian syndrome significantly decreased between the high-threat and the low-threat periods. These results support the threat-authoritarianism relationship but also suggest a more complicated theoretical model that links perceived social conditions, arousal of authoritarian sentiments, dispositional authoritarianism, and the nature of political appeals--particularly those that engage authoritarian aggression.     

The Gender Belief System,Authoritarianism, Social Dominance Orientation,and Heterosexuals' Attitudes Toward Lesbians and Gay Men

We tested hypotheses drawn from three theoretical perspectives—gender belief system, authoritarianism, and social dominance—concerning heterosexuals' attitudes toward lesbians and gay men. Data from 122 male and 131 female heterosexual college students with mostly White, middle-class backgrounds indicated that constructs postulated by all three perspectives played important roles in predicting attitudes: Gender differences in attitudes toward lesbians and gay men were mediated by social dominance orientation and gender-role beliefs, indicating that gender role beliefs may act as legitimizing myths to justify antigay attitudes. Authoritarianism had both a direct relationship to attitudes toward lesbians and gay men and an indirect relationship mediated by gender-role beliefs.     

The dimensional structure of people's fears,threats, and concerns and their relationship with right‐wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation

Most theories addressing the topic have proposed that threat and fear underlie right‐wing authoritarianism (RWA), and many empirical findings have been consistent with this proposition. Important questions, however, remain unanswered, such as whether RWA is associated with fear and threat in general or only specific kinds of fear and threat. Theories of RWA generate markedly different predictions on this issue, particularly with respect to social or personal fears, and whether the association would also hold for the closely related construct of social dominance orientation (SDO). We investigated the issue by asking 463 undergraduate students to rate their feelings of fear, concern, and anxiety to a comprehensive 93‐item list of potential fears and threats, which were formulated as either personal or social. Exploratory factors analysis identified five distinct fear–threat factors: Harm to Self, Child, or Country; Personal and Relationship Failures; Environmental and Economic Fears; Political and Personal Uncertainties; and Threats to Ingroup. All the fear–threat factors were correlated with RWA, with the strongest correlations being for Threats to Ingroup, and with stronger effects for social than for personal fears. None of the fear factors correlated with SDO. These relationships were not affected by controlling for Social Desirability or Emotional Stability (EMS). When the intercorrelations between fear factors and EMS were controlled using ridge regression, only Threats to Ingroup predicted RWA. Structural equation modeling indicated good fit for a model in which low levels of EMS had a significant path to Threats to Ingroup, which in turn had a significant path to RWA, and EMS having a significant though weak indirect (fully mediated) inverse effect on RWA. Implications of these findings for theories of authoritarianism and future research are discussed.     

Examining dispositional and situational effects on outgroup attitudes

Two research lines have dominated the quest for the antecedents of outgroup attitudes. Whereas the first has viewed outgroup attitudes as a result of individual differences, the second stressed the importance of the intergroup situation. In order to investigate the interplay of individual differences and situational characteristics, key predictors of the individual differences perspective (i.e. right‐wing authoritarianism or RWA, and social dominance orientation or SDO) and the intergroup relations perspective (i.e. ingroup identification and ingroup threat) were simultaneously tested. Two studies revealed additive but no interaction effects of RWA and SDO, ingroup identification and threat. Additionally, Study 1 showed that threat effects remain limited to the outgroup that is portrayed as threatening and do not generalize to other outgroups. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The intervening role of social worldviews in the relationship between the five‐factor model of personality and social attitudes

The present research investigates in a student (N = 183) and a voter sample (N = 276) whether the relationships between the Five‐Factor Model (FFM) personality dimensions and social attitudes (i.e. Right‐Wing Authoritarianism [RWA] and Social Dominance Orientation [SDO]) are mediated by social worldviews (i.e. dangerous and jungle worldviews). Two important results were obtained. First, the perception of the world as inherently dangerous and chaotic partially mediated the relationships of the personality dimensions Openness and Neuroticism and the social attitude RWA. Second, the jungle worldview completely mediated the relationships between Agreeableness and SDO, but considerable item overlap between the jungle worldview and SDO was also noted. It was further revealed that acquiescence response set and item overlap had an impact on social worldviews and attitudes, but that their relationships were hardly affected by these biases. The discussion focuses on the status of social worldviews to explain social attitudes. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.