On Self‐Love and Outgroup Hate: Opposite Effects of Narcissism on Prejudice via Social Dominance Orientation and Right‐Wing Authoritarianism

Previous research has obtained mixed findings as to whether feelings of self‐worth are positively or negatively related to right‐wing ideological beliefs and prejudice. We propose to clarify the link between self‐worth and ideology by distinguishing between narcissistic and non‐narcissistic self‐evaluations as well as between different dimensions of ideological attitudes. Four studies, conducted in three different socio‐political contexts: the UK (Study 1, N = 422), the US (Studies 2 and 3, Ns = 471 and 289, respectively), and Poland (Study 4, N = 775), investigated the associations between narcissistic and non‐narcissistic self‐evaluations, social dominance orientation (SDO), right‐wing authoritarianism (RWA), and ethnic prejudice. Confirming our hypotheses, the results consistently showed that after controlling for self‐esteem, narcissistic self‐evaluation was positively associated with SDO (accounting for RWA), yet negatively associated with RWA (accounting for SDO). These associations were similar after controlling for psychopathy and Machiavellianism (Study 3) as well as collective narcissism and Big Five personality characteristics (Study 4). Studies 2–4 additionally demonstrated that narcissistic self‐evaluation was indirectly positively associated with prejudice through higher SDO (free of RWA) but indirectly negatively associated with prejudice through lower RWA (free of SDO). Implications for understanding the role of self‐evaluation in right‐wing ideological attitudes and prejudice are discussed. Copyright © 2017 The Authors. European Journal of Personality published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Association of Personality Psychology     

Facets of Right‐Wing Authoritarianism Mediate the Relationship Between Religious Fundamentalism and Attitudes Toward Arabs and African Americans

Since the September 11 terrorist attacks, hate crimes against Arabs have increased in the United States. Despite recent increases in anti‐Arab attitudes, little psychological research has been conducted to understand this prejudice. Across two studies, we tested a theoretical model of Arab and African‐American prejudice. We found the aggression facet of right‐wing authoritarianism mediated the relationship between religious fundamentalism (RF) and prejudice toward Arabs and African Americans. Results are interpreted in light of previous research on cognitive rigidity, RF, and prejudice, and implications are made for political leaders conversing about Arab nations and peoples.     

Modern Racism Attitudes Among White Students: The Role of Dominance and Authoritarianism and the Mediating Effects of Racial Color-Blindness

ABSTRACT

Among 342 white college students, we examined the effects of social dominance orientation (SDO), right-wing authoritarianism (RWA), and racial color-blindness on modern racism attitudes. Structural equation modeling was used to test the indirect effects of SDO and RWA on modern racism attitudes through color-blind racial attitudes. We found strong indirect effects of SDO and RWA on modern racism through racial color-blindness. We did not find support for an alternative model, in which we tested racial color-blindness as a moderator of the effects of SDO and RWA on modern racism. Findings suggest that highly dominant and authoritarian white students endorse color-blind racial attitudes, although likely for different reasons. In turn, this predicts their modern racism attitudes. These findings indicate racial color-blindness is important to address as part of anti-racism education.     

Social Dominance Orientation and Right‐Wing Authoritarianism: Additive and Interactive Effects on Political Conservatism

It is commonly accepted that social dominance orientation (SDO) and right‐wing authoritarianism (RWA) are potent unique predictors of a variety of prejudice and prejudice‐related constructs. However, contrary to some predictions, there has been little evidence that these constructs interact to produce this outcome—they appear to be additive but not interactive in their prediction of prejudice. We extend the interaction hypothesis to consideration of another broadly relevant construct—political ideology. Drawing from 14 independent New Zealand–based samples, we show, through meta‐analysis and multilevel random coefficient modelling, that SDO and RWA additively and interactively predict levels of political conservatism operationalised in a variety of ways. Specifically, both constructs are associated with increasing political conservatism, and the lowest levels of conservatism (or highest levels of political liberalism) are found in those lowest in both SDO and RWA.     

The Mobilizing Effect of Right‐Wing Ideological Climates: Cross‐Level Interaction Effects on Different Types of Outgroup Attitudes

The present research investigated a multilevel person‐context interactionist framework for the relationship between right‐wing ideologies and prejudice across two large, representative samples (Study 1: European Social Survey: N = 56,752; Study 2: World Values Survey: N = 74,042). Across three different operationalizations of right‐wing ideology, two contextual levels (regional and national) of right‐wing climate, and three types of outgroup attitudes (i.e., age‐, ethnicity‐, and gender‐based), the analyses consistently revealed cross‐level interactions, showing a strong association between right‐wing attitudes and negative outgroup attitudes at the individual level in contexts with a low right‐wing climate, whereas this relationship is weaker and often even absent in contexts with a high right‐wing climate. These cross‐level interactions remained significant after controlling for statistical artefacts (i.e., restriction of range and outliers). The authors propose norm setting as the mobilizing mechanism through which a right‐wing climate develops and curbs the influence of individual right‐wing social‐ideological attitudes on outgroup attitudes.     

Interest and Expertise Moderate the Relationship between Right‐Wing Attitudes,Ideological Self‐Placement and Voting

Previous research has suggested that the association between right‐wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO) is moderated by political interest and involvement. It is here hypothesized that interest also strengthens the association of authoritarianism with political self‐placement and that higher levels of interest in politics shape voting choices that are more strongly associated with authoritarianism. Authoritarianism was defined as a second‐order factor reflecting onto SDO and RWA in a structural equation modelling approach. In Study 1 (two samples, total N = 873), interest was found to moderate the impact of authoritarianism, as hypothesized. In Study 2 (N = 721), a higher order interaction involving interest and political expertise was detected. These results were obtained with different measures and in different electoral campaigns. The motivational and cognitive underpinnings of the moderating effects are discussed. Copyright © 2012 European Association of Personality Psychology.     

To Love or Hate Thy Neighbor: The Role of Authoritarianism and Traditionalism in Explaining the Link Between Fundamentalism and Racial Prejudice

Fundamentalism is consistently related to racial prejudice (Hall, Matz, & Wood, 2010), yet the mechanisms for this relationship are unclear. We identify two core values of fundamentalism, authoritarianism and traditionalism, that independently contribute to the fundamentalism‐racial prejudice relationship. We also contextualize the fundamentalism‐racial prejudice relationship by suggesting that fundamentalists may show prejudice based on conceptions of African Americans as violating values but show tolerance when prejudice is less justifiable. These ideas are tested and confirmed using three data sets from the American National Election Studies. Across all three samples, fundamentalism is related to increases in symbolic racism but decreases in negative affect towards African Americans, and these relationships are mediated by both authoritarianism and traditionalism.     

Common Ideological Roots of Speciesism and Generalized Ethnic Prejudice: The Social Dominance Human–Animal Relations Model (SD‐HARM)

Recent research and theorizing suggest that desires for group‐based dominance underpin biases towards both human outgroups and (non‐human) animals. A systematic study of the common ideological roots of human–human and human–animal biases is, however, lacking. Three studies (in Belgium, UK, and USA) tested the Social Dominance Human–Animal Relations Model (SD‐HARM) proposing that Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) is a key factor responsible for the significant positive association between ethnic outgroup attitudes and speciesist attitudes towards animals, even after accounting for other ideological variables (that possibly confound previous findings). Confirming our hypotheses, the results consistently demonstrated that SDO, more than right‐wing authoritarianism (RWA), is a key factor connecting ethnic prejudice and speciesist attitudes. Furthermore, Studies 2 and 3 showed that both SDO and RWA are significantly related to perceived threat posed by vegetarianism (i.e. ideologies and diets minimizing harm to animals), but with SDO playing a focal role in explaining the positive association between threat perceptions and ethnic prejudice. Study 3 replicated this pattern, additionally including political conservatism in the model, itself a significant correlate of speciesism. Finally, a meta‐analytic integration across studies provided robust support for SD‐HARM and offers important insights into the psychological parallels between human intergroup and human–animal relations. Copyright © 2016 European Association of Personality Psychology     

Differential Effects of Right‐Wing Authoritarianism and Social Dominance Orientation on Dimensions of Generalized Prejudice in Brazil

Previous research within a dual‐process cognitive‐motivational theory of ideology and prejudice has indicated that dimensions of generalized prejudice are structured around attitudes towards dangerous, derogated and dissident groups, and that these prejudice dimensions are differentially predicted by the ideological attitudes of Right‐Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO). However, to date, these findings have been restricted to New Zealand samples. We describe two studies examining whether the structure of prejudiced attitudes and the differential prediction by RWA and SDO replicate in the Brazilian context, incorporating context‐relevant examples of each group—politicians, those from the northeast region of Brazil, and environmentalists. Results broadly supported the three‐factor structure of dangerous, derogated, and dissident groups. Consistent with previous research, regression and structural equation analyses showed that RWA explained prejudice against dangerous groups, SDO explained prejudice against derogated groups, and both RWA and SDO explained prejudice against dissident groups. This research provides some evidence for the generalizability of the three‐dimensional structure of generalized prejudice and differential prediction by RWA and SDO. Copyright © 2014 European Association of Personality Psychology     

The Mediating Role of Information Search in the Relationship Between Prejudice and Voting Behavior

Evidence on the extent to which prejudice serves as a barrier to black and Latino candidates for office is mixed. Some research has found that black and Latino candidates are disadvantaged in terms of their chances of winning election and that they are evaluated differently by voters, while other findings suggest that this may not be the case. This article examines the effects of racial prejudice on candidate evaluation and voting behavior. It uses a unique experimental design to test for direct effects of prejudice on candidate evaluation and voting behavior, as well as indirect effects of prejudice on these variables via the information that subjects seek out. I find that subjects higher in symbolic racism are less likely to vote “correctly” when their preferences most closely align with a black or Latino candidate and that they rate minority candidates more negatively than their white counterparts. I also find that subjects high in prejudice search for less information about minority candidates and that this less robust information search mediates the relationship between prejudice and candidate evaluation and vote measures. Results also suggest that increased information search may mitigate the effects of prejudice on correct voting.     

Parent–Child Similarity in Common and Specific Components of Prejudice: The Role of Ideological Attitudes and Political Discussion

Using a representative sample of Belgian adolescents (N = 1530) and both their parents, we investigated the parent–child similarity in prejudice towards different out‐groups and ideological attitudes (right‐wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation). Contrary to previous studies, first, we distinguished between common and specific components of prejudice to test whether the parent–child similarity in one specific type of prejudice was symptomatic of parent–child similarity in prejudice towards out‐groups in general. Second, we evaluated whether the parent–child similarity in common and specific components of prejudice was related to the parent–child similarity in ideological attitudes. Third, we investigated the moderating role of political discussion in the intergenerational framework of ideology and prejudice. Results indicated that parent–child similarity was particularly pronounced for the common rather than the specific component of prejudice and that the similarity in ideological attitudes was partly related to the similarity in the common component of prejudice. Finally, adolescents who discuss social and political issues more (versus less) frequently with their parents more strongly resembled their parents in the common component of prejudice and levels of authoritarianism. These results suggest that generalized prejudice runs in families and highlight politicization of the family as an important socialization mechanism. Copyright © 2015 European Association of Personality Psychology     

Threat and Right‐Wing Attitudes: A Cross‐National Approach

Threat relates to right‐wing ideological attitudes at the individual level. The present study aims to extend this relationship to the national level. More specifically, in a sample of 91 nations, we collected country‐level indicators of threat (including inflation, unemployment, gross national product, homicide rate, and life expectancy). Moreover, we analyzed data from the European and World Value Survey (total N = 134,516) to obtain aggregated country‐level indicators for social‐cultural and economic‐hierarchical right‐wing attitudes for each of these countries. In accordance with previous findings based on the individual level, a positive relationship between threat indicators and right‐wing attitudes emerged. This relationship was stronger than what was usually reported at the individual level. In the discussion, we focus on the mutually reinforcing influence at the individual and national levels in terms of right‐wing attitudes.     

Multidimensionality of Right‐Wing Authoritarian Attitudes: Authoritarianism‐Conservatism‐Traditionalism

Traditionally Right‐Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) has been seen as a unidimensional construct. Recently, however, researchers have begun to measure three distinct RWA dimensions (Feldman, 2003; Funke, 2005; Van Hiel, Cornelis, Roets, & De Clercq, 2006). One of these new multidimensional RWA approaches has conceptualized these three dimensions as Authoritarianism, Conservatism, and Traditionalism (ACT), which are viewed as expressions of basic social values or motivational goals that represent different, though related, strategies for attaining collective security at the expense of individual autonomy. Findings are reported from two studies to assess the validity and predictive utility of the multidimensional ACT approach. First, a direct cross‐national comparison showed that the three ACT dimensions were reliable and factorially distinct and demonstrated the measurement invariance of the three latent constructs across Serbian and NZ (New Zealand) samples. The three ACT dimensions predicted self‐reported behavior differentially in both samples, and a comparison of latent means showed the Serbian sample higher than the NZ sample on the ACT dimensions of Authoritarianism and Traditionalism but markedly lower on Conservatism. Second, a reanalysis of previously collected NZ data showed that the three ACT scales differentially predicted three dimensions of generalized prejudice in a theoretically meaningful manner. These findings underline the importance of studying ideological attitudes, such as RWA, multidimensionally.     

When Authoritarians Confront Prejudice. Differential Effects of SDO and RWA on Support for Hate‐Speech Prohibition

Two nationwide representative studies (N = 653 adolescents; N = 1007 adults) investigated the psychological correlates of the intention to penalize public expressions of prejudice in the form of support for hate‐speech prohibition. We presented participants with preselected examples of hate speech from the Internet and other mass media and assessed their willingness to support the prohibition of public expressions of such remarks. Both studies found that social dominance orientation and right‐wing authoritarianism are positively correlated with outgroup prejudice, but they have differential effects on hate‐speech prohibition. Social dominance orientation was positively related to the acceptance of hate speech, whereas right‐wing authoritarianism was positively related to hate‐speech prohibition. In discussing this counterintuitive finding, we suggest that right‐wing authoritarians are particularly vigilant toward norm violations—and this makes them more punitive toward counternormative expressions of prejudice, such as hate speech.     

Extreme‐Right Voting in Western Europe: The Role of Social‐Cultural and Antiegalitarian Attitudes

The joint impact of antiegalitarian attitudes and social‐cultural attitudes on citizens’ tendency to vote for extreme right‐wing political parties was investigated. In the first study, we explored these attitudes in representative samples of seven Western European countries. In a follow‐up study, we predicted respondents’ likelihood of voting for a Dutch right‐wing party on the basis of the measures of social‐dominance orientation (as an indicator of antiegalitarian attitudes) and right‐wing authoritarianism (as an indicator of social‐cultural attitudes). Our findings demonstrated that voting for extreme right‐wing parties was associated more consistently with antiegalitarian attitudes than with social‐cultural attitudes. Moreover, the effect of antiegalitarian attitudes was partly mediated by migration attitudes (Study 1) and ethnic prejudice (Study 2). We discuss the finding that antiegalitarian attitudes are more strongly related to extreme right‐wing voting than social‐cultural attitudes.     

The Differential Effects of Right‐Wing Authoritarianism and Social Dominance Orientation on Political Intolerance

Decades of scholarship have identified several determinants of political intolerance, including authoritarianism and normative threat. Previous attempts in the literature to associate other individual difference variables (i.e., social dominance orientation [SDO]) and situational variables (i.e., out‐groups' gains in power and status) have been unsuccessful. Using a dual‐process motivational (DPM) model framework, in Study 1 we found that SDO predicted political intolerance of groups with hierarchy‐attenuating political objectives. This relationship was consistent over and above other well‐known predictors of political intolerance, including right‐wing authoritarianism (RWA). RWA predicted intolerance of groups with both hierarchy‐attenuating and cohesion‐reducing objectives. In Study 2, we manipulated whether an immigrant‐rights group was described as presenting a normative threat or as gaining power and status. Consistent with extant findings, RWA moderated the effect of normative threat on political intolerance. More interestingly, SDO moderated the effect of gains in power and status on political intolerance. The implications of these findings are discussed.     

Prejudice in the pub: How alcohol and ideology loosen the tongue

This study (N = 124) tested the main and interactive effects of alcohol consumption, egalitarianism, and right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) in relation to prejudice suppression in the natural environment of a British Public House (pub). Employing a quasi-experimental between-subjects design, participants who had consumed alcohol were worse at suppressing their prejudice than participants with no alcohol consumption. Further, the more participants endorsed egalitarian values, the more they were able to suppress their prejudice. This tendency was resistant to the effects of alcohol. By contrast, the stronger participants held RWA beliefs, the less they were able to suppress their prejudice. In addition, this tendency was accentuated by alcohol consumption. Results are discussed in terms of theoretical and practical implications.     

The Association of Cognitive Ability with Right‐wing Ideological Attitudes and Prejudice: A Meta‐analytic Review

The cognitive functioning of individuals with stronger endorsement of right‐wing and prejudiced attitudes has elicited much scholarly interest. Whereas many studies investigated cognitive styles, less attention has been directed towards cognitive ability. Studies investigating the latter topic generally reveal lower cognitive ability to be associated with stronger endorsement of right‐wing ideological attitudes and greater prejudice. However, this relationship has remained widely unrecognized in literature. The present meta‐analyses revealed an average effect size of r = ?.20 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) [?0.23, ?0.17]; based on 67 studies, N = 84 017] for the relationship between cognitive ability and right‐wing ideological attitudes and an average effect size of r = ?.19 (95% CI [?0.23, ?0.16]; based on 23 studies, N = 27 011) for the relationship between cognitive ability and prejudice. Effect sizes did not vary significantly across different cognitive abilities and sample characteristics. The effect strongly depended on the measure used for ideological attitudes and prejudice, with the strongest effect sizes for authoritarianism and ethnocentrism. We conclude that cognitive ability is an important factor in the genesis of ideological attitudes and prejudice and thus should become more central in theorizing and model building. Copyright © 2015 European Association of Personality Psychology     

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.