Search

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research has shown that two individual difference dimensions, Right-Wing authoritarianism (RWA) and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO), consistently predict prejudice. Traditionally it has been assumed that RWA and SDO both index generalized dispositions to dislike outgroups and those who differ, and therefore predict prejudice similarly. An alternative approach suggests that RWA and SDO express different motivational bases for prejudice that differentially interact with intergroup conditions to predict prejudice. This was tested by investigating students' reactions to varying descriptions of a bogus immigrant group. As hypothesized, the degree to which RWA and SDO predicted opposition to the immigrants was differentially contingent on the degree to which the immigrants were described as economically competitive, socially threatening (deviant) and socio-economically disadvantaged. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) has been conceptualized and measured as a unidimensional personality construct comprising the covariation of the three traits of authoritarian submission, authoritarian aggression, and conventionalism. However, new approaches have criticized this conceptualization and instead viewed these three “traits” as three distinct, though related, social attitude dimensions. Here we extend this approach providing clear definitions of these three dimensions as ideological attitude constructs of Authoritarianism, Conservatism, and Traditionalism. These dimensions are seen as attitudinal expressions of basic social values or motivational goals that represent different, though related, strategies for attaining collective security at the expense of individual autonomy. We report data from five samples and three different countries showing that these three dimensions could be reliably measured and were factorially distinct. The three dimensions also differentially predicted interpersonal behaviour, social policy support, and political party support. It is argued that conceptualizing and measuring RWA as a set of three related ideological attitude dimensions may better explain complex sociopolitical phenomena than the currently dominant unidimensional personality based model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A Dual Process Model (DPM) approach to prejudice proposes that there should be at least two dimensions of generalized prejudice relating to outgroup stratification and social perception, which should be differentially predicted by Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO). The current study assessed the causal effects of SDO and RWA on three dimensions of prejudice using a full cross-lagged longitudinal sample (N = 127). As expected, RWA, but not SDO, predicted prejudice towards ‘dangerous’ groups, SDO, but not RWA, predicted prejudice towards ‘derogated’ groups, and both RWA and SDO predicted prejudice towards ‘dissident’ groups. Results support previously untested causal predictions derived from the DPM and indicate that different forms of prejudice result from different SDO- and RWA-based motivational processes. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Several personality constructs have been theorised to underlie right-wing authoritarianism (RWA). In samples from New Zealand and Germany (Ns = 218, 259), we tested whether these constructs can account for specific variance in RWA. In both samples, social conformity and personal need for structure were independent predictors of RWA. In Sample 2, where also openness to experience was measured, social conformity and personal need for structure fully mediated the impact of the higher-order factor of openness on RWA. Our results contribute to the integration of current approaches to the personality basis of authoritarianism and suggest that two distinct personality processes contribute to RWA: An interpersonal process related to social conformity and an intrapersonal process related to rigid cognitive style. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article investigates the psychometric properties and correlates of the Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) Scale using a sample of white South African students. Although item analysis has often been used to assess the degree to which a scale is unidimensional, this procedure is highly unsatisfactory and can lead to extremely deceptive results. For example, an item analysis would suggest unidimensionality whenever two or more approximately equal item subsets comprising independent factors are contained within a single scale (Mclver & Carmines, 1981, pp. 30-31). For this reason, it has been recommended that factor analysis be used to ascertain whether scales are adequately unidimensional before item analyses are conducted to assess reliability. Overall, the RWA Scale was adequately unidirnensional and highly reliable. The evidence for the RWA Scale's construct validity was impressive, with the validity coefficients not merely highly statistically significant, but also indicating powerful effects in all cases. The strong correlation between the RWA Scale and prejudice in South Africa suggests that psychological factors are no less important in determining preju- dice in very highly prejudiced settings such as South Africa, where there seem to be powerful normative conformity pressures to hold prejudiced attitudes, than they are in other settings.

Although Adorno et al. related F-scale authoritarianism to childhood socialization, substantial F scale/SES correlations have suggested alternative explanations in terms of SES or such concepts as breadth of perspective. Ray has also argued that the F scale only measures attitudinal authoritarianism and has therefore presented his directiveness scale as a behaviorally valid measure of authoritarian personality. The present study attempted to elucidate some of these issues by examining the prediction of F scale authoritarianism from directiveness scores, culture, class, and other demographic variables in a large community sample of white South Africans. The results indicated that culture (language group) was the best predictor of F-scale scores, SES was only weakly predictive, and directiveness had no predictive utility. A sex effect, with higher F scale scores for men, emerged for Afrikaans-speaking but not English-speaking Ss. These findings seemed to be reasonably compatible with a socialization explanation of F-scale authoritarianism but inconsistent with explanations in terms of SES or such concepts as breadth of perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although some studies have reported a positive association between F-scale authoritarianism and personal psychopathology, others have found no correlation at all. One interpretation which may account at least partially for this inconsistency is that the nature of the authoritarianism/adjustment relationship may be influenced by the social norms and conformity pressures prevailing in a given social context. Arguing along these lines, Orpen has reported a correlation of .6 between measures of conservatism and adjustment among white South African schoolchildren. This study has been much cited as a demonstration that authoritarianism and conservatism tend to be associated with better adjustment in highly authoritarian cultures. His finding, however, was derived from a small and rather atypical sample of 69 middle-class English-speaking schoolchildren in Cape Town, a particularly liberal city, by South African standards. Thus, in the absence of any previous attempts, the present study set out to attempt a replication of Orpen's finding by using a much more adequate and representative sample. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: A meta-analysis of 46 studies (N =12,939) examined the cross-sectional associations between dangerous worldview and Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA), and between competitive worldview and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO). These dual associations were asymmetric; the dangerous worldview-RWA partial-correlation was moderate (r =.37), whereas the competitive worldview-SDO partial-correlation was stronger in size (r =.53). The results support a dual-process model perspective and indicate that RWA and SDO are consistently linked with distinct social schemas of the social world as dangerous and threatening (versus safe and secure), and competitive and cut-throat (versus co-operative and characterized by mutually beneficial exchange). We present a refined competitive worldview scale that reduces content overlap and provides a more accurate estimate of the worldview-SDO association. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: We compare and contrast existing broad-bandwidth and frequency-specific worldview measures in the prediction of Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO). As expected, broad-bandwidth and frequency-specific measures of dangerous worldview predicted common variance in RWA, and competitive worldview measures predicted common variance in SDO. Only the broad-bandwidth measures retained a unique concurrent association with RWA and SDO (n =347 New Zealand undergraduates). We argue that these alternative worldview measures share a common component reflecting schematic beliefs about the level of danger and threat in the social world (a descriptive belief component). The broad-bandwidth measure should be better suited for assessing a mixture of descriptive and prescriptive beliefs about how the social world ought to be, whereas the newer frequency-specific index is better suited for isolating the descriptive component of social worldview schemas. Directions for research examining heuristic biases that shape descriptive components of social worldview schemas are discussed. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]