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

Political Psychology

Volumn 35, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 557-576

  Crawford, Jarret T ^a   Pilanski, Jane M ^a  

^a The College of New Jersey   (United States)

Author keywords

Dual process model; Political intolerance; Right wing authoritarianism; Social dominance orientation

Indexed keywords

EID: 84904647162     PISSN: 0162895X     EISSN: 14679221     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/pops.12066     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswick, E., Levinson, D. J., & Sanford, R. N. (1950). The authoritarian personality. New York, NY: Harper.
2. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
3. Altemeyer, B. (1988). Enemies of freedom: Understanding right-wing authoritarianism. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
4. Altemeyer, B. (1996). The authoritarian specter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
5. Altemeyer, B. (1998). The other "authoritarian personality." In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 30, pp. 47-91). New York, NY: Academic Press.
6. Arbuckle, J. L. (2009). Amos 18.0 User's Guide. Chicago, IL: Amos Development Corporation.
7. Berinsky, A. J., Huber, G. A., & Lenz, G. S. (2012). Evaluating online labor markets for experimental research: Amazon.com's Mechanical Turk. Political Analysis, 20, 351-368.
8. Bollen, K., & Long, J. (Eds.). (1993). Testing structural equation models. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
9. Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011). Amazon's Mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6(1), 3-5.
10. Crawford, J. T. (2012). The ideologically objectionable premise model: Predicting biased political judgments on the left and right. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(1), 138-151.
11. Crawford, J. T., Jussim, L., Cain, T. R., & Cohen, F. (2013). Right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation differentially predict biased evaluations of media reports. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 43(1), 163-174.
12. Dhont, K., & Van Hiel, A. (2009). We must not be enemies: Interracial contact and the reduction of prejudice among authoritarians. Personality and Individual Differences, 46, 172-177.
13. Duckitt, J. (2001). A dual-process cognitive-motivational theory of ideology and prejudice. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 41-113.
14. Duckitt, J. (2006). Differential effects of right wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation on outgroup attitudes and their mediation by threat from and competitiveness to outgroups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(5), 684-696.
15. Duckitt, J., Bizumic, B., Krauss, S. W., & Heled, E. (2010). A tripartite approach to right-wing authoritarianism: The authoritarianism-conservatism-traditionalism model. Political Psychology, 31(5), 685-715.
16. Duckitt, J., & Farre, B. (1994). Right-wing authoritarianism and political intolerance among Whites in the future majority rule South Africa. Journal of Social Psychology, 134, 735-742.
17. Duckitt, J., & Sibley, C. G. (2007). Right wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, and the dimensions of generalized prejudice. European Journal of Personality, 21, 113-130.
18. Duckitt, J., & Sibley, C. G. (2009). A dual-process motivational model of ideology, politics, and prejudice. Psychological Inquiry, 20, 98-109.
19. Duckitt, J., & Sibley, C. G. (2010a). Personality, ideology, prejudice, and politics: A dual process motivational model. Journal of Personality, 78(6), 1861-1893.
20. Duckitt, J., & Sibley, C. G. (2010b). Right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation differentially moderate intergroup effects on prejudice. European Journal of Personality, 24(7), 583-601.
21. Duckitt, J., Wagner, C., du Plessis, I., & Birum, I. (2002). The psychological bases of ideology and prejudice: Testing a dual process model. Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 75-93.
22. Duriez, B., & van Hiel, A. (2002). The march of modern fascism: A comparison of social dominance orientation and authoritarianism. Personality and Individual Differences, 32, 1199-1213.
23. Esses, V. M., Jackson, L. M., & Armstrong, T. L. (1998). Intergroup competition and attitudes toward immigrants and immigration: An Instrumental model of group conflict. Journal of Social Issues, 54(4), 699-724.
24. Feldman, S. (2003). Enforcing social conformity: a theory of authoritarianism. Political Psychology, 24(1), 41-74.
25. Feldman, S., & Stenner, K. (1997). Perceived threat and authoritarianism. Political Psychology, 18, 741-770.
26. Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., Glick, P., & Xu, J. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 878-902.
27. Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. J., & Sanford, R. N. (1947). The antidemocratic personality. In E. E. Maccoby, T. M. Newcomb, & E. L. Hartley (Eds.), Readings in social psychology (pp. 636-646). New York, NY: Henry Holt & Co.
28. Gibson, J. L. (2006). Enigmas of intolerance: Fifty years after Stouffer's communism, conformity, and civil liberties. Perspectives on Politics, 4, 21-34.
29. Gibson, J. L., & Gouws, A. (2003). Overcoming intolerance in South Africa: Experiments in democratic persuasion. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
30. Goodman, J. K., Cryder, C. E., & Cheema, A. (2012). Data collection in a flat world: The strengths and weaknesses of Mechanical Turk samples. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making. Forthcoming.
31. Henry, P. J. (2008). College sophomores in the laboratory redux: Influences of a narrow data base on social psychology's view of the nature of prejudice. Psychological Inquiry, 19, 49-71.
32. Hewstone, M., Rubin, M., & Willis, H. (2002). Intergroup bias. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 575-604.
33. Hodson, G., & Costello, K. (2007). Interpersonal disgust, ideological orientations, and dehumanization as predictors of intergroup attitudes. Psychological Science, 18, 691-698.
34. Horton, J. J., Rand, D. G., & Zeckhauser, R. J. (2011). The online laboratory. Experimental Economics, 14(3), 399-425.
35. Hu, L.-T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indices in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.
36. MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1, 130-149.
37. Marcus, G. E., Sullivan, J. L., Theiss-Morse, E., & Wood, S. L. (1995). With malice toward some: How people make civil liberties judgments. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
38. McClosky, H., & Brill, A. (1983). Dimensions of tolerance: What Americans believe about civil liberties. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
39. Oppenheimer, D. M., Meyvis, T., & Davidenko, N. (2009). Instructional manipulation checks: Detecting satisficing to increase statistical power. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(4), 867-872.
40. Paxton, P., & Mughan, A. (2006). What's to fear from Immigrants? Creating an assimilationist threat scale. Political Psychology, 27(4), 549-568.
41. Peterson, B. E., Doty, R. M., & Winter, D. G. (1993). Authoritarianism and attitudes toward contemporary social issues. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 174-184.
42. Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L. M., & Malle, B. F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(4), 741-763.
43. Rowatt, W. C., LaBouff, J., Johnson, M., Froese, P., & Tsang, J. (2009). Associations among religiousness, social attitudes, and prejudice in a national sample of American adults. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 1(1), 14-24.
44. Sears, D. O. (1986). College sophomores in the laboratory: Influences of a narrow data base on social psychology's view of human nature. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(3), 515-530.
45. Sibley, C. G., & Duckitt, J. (2008). Personality and prejudice: A meta-analysis and theoretical review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12, 248-279.
46. Sibley, C. G., Robertson, A., & Wilson, M. S. (2006). Social dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism: Additive and interactive effects. Political Psychology, 27, 755-768.
47. Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
48. Sidanius, J., Pratto, F., & Bobo, L. (1996). Racism, conservatism, Affirmative Action, and intellectual sophistication: A matter of principled conservatism or group dominance? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(3), 476-490.
49. Stenner, K. (2005). The authoritarian dynamic. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
50. Stouffer, S. A. (1955). Communism, conformity, and civil liberties. New York, NY: Doubleday.
51. Sullivan, J. L., Marcus, G. E., Feldman, S., & Piereson, J. E. (1981). The sources of political tolerance: A multivariate analysis. American Political Science Review, 75(1), 92-106.
52. Sullivan, J. E., & Transue, J. E. (1999). The psychological underpinnings of democracy: A selective review of research on political tolerance, interpersonal trust, and social capital. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 625-650.
53. Thomsen, L., Green, E. G. T., & Sidanius, J. (2008). We will hunt them down: How social dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism fuel ethnic persecution of immigrants in fundamentally different ways. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 1455-1464.
54. Van Hiel, A., & Mervielde, I. (2002). Social identification among political party voters and members: An empirical test of optimal distinctiveness theory. Journal of Social Psychology, 142, 202-209.
55. Van Hiel, A., Pandelaere, M., & Duriez, B. (2004). The impact of need for closure on conservative beliefs and racism: Differential mediation by authoritarian submission and authoritarian dominance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 824-837.
56. Wilson, G. D. (1973). The psychology of conservatism. London: Academic Press.
57. Zakrisson, I. (2005). Construction of a short version of the right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 863-872.