The psychological causes and societal consequences of authoritarianism.

Over the past two decades, citizens' political rights and civil liberties have declined globally. Psychological science can play an instrumental role in both explaining and combating the authoritarian impulses that underlie these attacks on personal autonomy. In this Review, we describe the psychological processes and situational factors that foster authoritarianism, as well as the societal consequences of its apparent resurgence within the general population. First, we summarize the dual process motivational model of ideology and prejudice, which suggests that viewing the world as a dangerous, but not necessarily competitive, place plants the psychological seeds of authoritarianism. Next, we discuss the evolutionary, genetic, personality and developmental antecedents to authoritarianism and explain how contextual threats to safety and security activate authoritarian predispositions. After examining the harmful consequences of authoritarianism for intergroup relations and broader societal attitudes, we discuss the need to expand the ideological boundaries of authoritarianism and encourage future research to investigate both right-wing and left-wing variants of authoritarianism.

The dual process model of ideology and prejudice: a longitudinal test during a global recession.

This study tested the pathways between personality, social worldviews, and ideology, predicted by the Dual Process Model (DPM) of ideology and prejudice. These paths were tested using a full cross-lagged panel design administered to a New Zealand community sample in early 2008 (before the effects of the global financial crisis reached New Zealand) and again in 2009 (when the crisis was near its peak; n = 247). As hypothesized, low openness to experience predicted residualized change in dangerous worldview, which in turn predicted right-wing authoritarianism (RWA). Low agreeableness predicted competitive worldview, which in turn predicted social dominance orientation (SDO). RWA and SDO also exerted unexpected reciprocal effects on worldviews. This study provides the most comprehensive longitudinal test of the DPM to date, and was conducted during a period of systemic instability when the causal effects predicted by the DPM should be, and were, readily apparent.

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.

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.

What's in a flag? Subliminal exposure to New Zealand national symbols and the automatic activation of egalitarian versus dominance values.

Three experiments tested whether the subliminal presentation of national symbols automatically elicited societally prescribed normative values in the New Zealand (NZ) context using a lexical decision task. Consistent with research in the United States, the presentation of the NZ flag (Study 1), but not another consensually validated NZ national symbol (The Silver Fern, Study 2), increased the cognitive accessibility of egalitarian value concepts. The NZ flag did not, however, activate values in a comparable sample of foreign nationals (Study 3). National flags, it seems, automatically activate normative values for ingroup members, and this effect is not limited to nations with a high frequency of flag-display behavior such as the United States.

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 personality bases of ideology: a one-year longitudinal study.

The cross-lagged effects of the Big-Five personality dimensions on Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) and Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) were examined over 1 year (N = 112). Consistent with the Dual Process Cognitive-Motivational Model, SDO and RWA exhibited markedly different personality bases. Low Agreeableness and unexpectedly high Extraversion predicted change in the motivational goal for group-based dominance and superiority (SDO), whereas Openness to Experience predicted change in the motivational goal for social cohesion and collective security (RWA). Neuroticism and Conscientiousness did not predict change in SDO or RWA over time. These findings extend previous cross-sectional (correlational) research and indicate that key dimensions of personality (primarily Agreeableness and Openness to Experience) are an important temporal antecedent of the group-based motivational goals underlying individual differences in prejudice.

Big-five personality, social worldviews, and ideological attitudes: further tests of a dual process cognitive-motivational model.

In this study, we extended the Dual Process Model of Ideology and Prejudice by incorporating the Five-Factor Model of Personality (N = 924). Disagreeable people tended to view the social world as competitive, which in turn predicted heightened motivations for group-based dominance and superiority (Social Dominance Orientation or SDO), whereas people low in Openness to Experience and high in Conscientiousness directly expressed heightened security-cohesion motivations (Right-Wing Authoritarianism or RWA). Other personality dimensions were weakly associated with RWA, and these effects were mediated by dangerous worldview. Multiple distinct aspects of personality predict SDO and RWA both directly and indirectly through worldviews, but we found little evidence for the possibility that personality alters the extent to which worldviews (once formed) predict SDO and RWA.

Personality and prejudice: a meta-analysis and theoretical review.

Despite a substantial literature examining personality, prejudice, and related constructs such as Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO), there have been no systematic reviews in this area. The authors reviewed and meta-analyzed 71 studies (N = 22,068 participants) investigating relationships between Big Five dimensions of personality, RWA, SDO, and prejudice. RWA was predicted by low Openness to Experience but also Conscientiousness, whereas SDO was predicted by low Agreeableness and also weakly by low Openness to Experience. Consistent with a dual-process motivational model of ideology and prejudice, the effects of Agreeableness on prejudice were fully mediated by SDO, and those of Openness to Experience were largely mediated by RWA. Finally, the effects of Agreeableness and Openness to Experience were robust and consistent across samples, although subtle moderating factors were identified, including differences in personality inventory (NEO Personality Inventory-Revised vs. Big Five Inventory), differences across prejudice domain, and cross-cultural differences in Conscientiousness and Neuroticism. Implications for the study of personality and prejudice are discussed.

Antecedents of men's hostile and benevolent sexism: the dual roles of social dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism.

The authors argue that individual differences in men's Benevolent Sexism (BS) stem from a threat-driven security-cohesion motivation, indexed by Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA), whereas Hostile Sexism (HS) stems from a competitively driven motivation for intergroup dominance, indexed by Social Dominance Orientation (SDO). In Study 1, meta-analysis indicated that men's SDO (controlling for RWA) was moderately positively associated with HS (r = .35) but not BS (r = .05), whereas men's RWA (controlling for SDO) was moderately associated with BS (r = .36) but only weakly associated with HS (r = .16). Study 2 replicated and extended these results by also modeling the dual personality traits and world-views underlying HS and BS. In Study 3, longitudinal analyses demonstrated that SDO predicted increases in HS (but not BS) and RWA predicted increases in BS (but not HS) throughout a 5-month period. Relations between the sociostructural and individual difference bases of men's ambivalent sexism are discussed.

Differential effects of right wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation on outgroup attitudes and their mediation by threat from and competitiveness to outgroups.

A dual-process model of individual differences in prejudice proneness proposes that Right Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) will influence prejudice against particular outgroups through different motivational mechanisms. RWA should cause negative attitudes toward groups seen as threatening social control, order, cohesion, and stability, such as deviant groups, and negativity toward these groups should be mediated through perceived threat from them. SDO should cause negative attitudes toward groups that activate competitiveness over relative dominance and superiority, such as socially subordinate groups low in power and status, and negativity toward these groups should be mediated through competitiveness toward them. Findings from four student samples that assessed attitudes toward seven social groups selected as likely to vary systematically in social threat and social subordination supported these predictions. The findings have implications for reconciling intergroup and individual difference explanations of prejudice and for interventions to reduce prejudice.

Group identification and outgroup attitudes in four South African ethnic groups: a multidimensional approach.

Although Sumner's ethnocentrism hypothesis, which expects stronger group identification to be associated with more negative outgroup attitudes, has been widely accepted, empirical findings have been inconsistent. This research investigates the relationship of four dimensions of ethnocultural group identification previously proposed by Phinney, that is, salience, evaluation, attachment, and involvement, with attitudes to ethnic outgroups in four South African ethnocultural groups (Africans, Afrikaans Whites, English Whites, Indians). The findings supported the factorial independence of the four identification dimensions and indicated that only one, ethnocultural evaluation (ingroup attitudes), was systematically related to outgroup attitudes, but the association could be positive, negative, or zero. Both functionalist and similarity-dissimilarity approaches to intergroup relations seemed to provide plausible explanations for the pattern of relationships obtained between ingroup and outgroup attitudes.

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.