scholarly journals Experiments in political psychology

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kyle Fischer ◽  
Quentin Atkinson ◽  
Ananish Chaudhuri

This chapter provides an overview of studies that use incentivised experiments to study political ideology. We look first at studies that conceptualise political ideology along a unidimensional liberal-conservative spectrum and explore whether there are behavioural differences between liberals and conservatives. While recent studies find that liberals display more pro-sociality, many other studies find that liberals and conservatives display similar levels of pro-social, ingroup-biased, normative, and punitive behaviour. We then turn to experiments that study two-dimensional political ideology as embodied in the concepts of economic conservatism/progressivism (often measured with the Social Dominance Orientation scale) and social conservatism/progressivism (usually measured with the Right-Wing Authoritarianism scale). In such experiments, economic conservatives display lower levels of pro-sociality and universalism and greater tolerance of inequality and tendencies to harm outgroups. Social conservatives tend to display “groupishness”, including distrusting anonymous strangers, cooperating with ingroup members, following rules, punishing in the ultimatum game, and sometimes harming outgroups.

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Artur Nilsson ◽  
John Jost

According to Silvan Tomkins’ polarity theory, ideological thought is universally structured by a clash between two opposing worldviews. On the left, a humanistic worldview seeks to uphold the intrinsic value of the person; on the right, a normative worldview holds that human worth is contingent upon conformity to rules. In this article, we situate humanism and normativism within the context of contemporary models of political ideology as a function of motivated social cognition, beliefs about the social world, and personality traits. In four studies conducted in the U.S. and Sweden, normativism was robustly associated with rightist (or conservative) self-placement; conservative issue preferences; resistance to change and acceptance of inequality; right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation; system justification and its underlying epistemic and existential motives to reduce uncertainty and threat; and a lack of openness, emotionality, and honesty-humility. Humanism exhibited the opposite relations to most of these constructs, but it was largely unrelated to epistemic and existential needs. Humanism was strongly associated with preferences for equality, openness to change, and low levels of authoritarianism, social dominance, and general and economic system justification. We conclude that polarity theory possesses considerable potential to explain how conflicts between worldviews shape contemporary politics.


2017 ◽  
Vol 120 (3) ◽  
pp. 364-373 ◽  
Author(s):  
Howard Michael Crowson ◽  
Joyce A. Brandes

Historically, much of the research on right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation has proceeded from the assumption that they are unidimensional. Recently, researchers have begun to seriously consider the possibility that they are multidimensional in nature and should be measured as such. Several studies have examined the unique relationships between right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation facets and social and political outcome measures of interest. However, there have been no efforts to include the full slate of right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation facets as predictors in the same model. This is problematic when investigating the discriminant validity of these facets, given the potential empirical overlap among the facets both within and across scales. We included facets of right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation as predictors of U.S. voters’ intentions to vote for Hillary Clinton versus Donald Trump in the 2016 Presidential Election. Data were collected in September 2016. We found evidence for the discriminant validity of several of the right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation facets.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kyle Fischer ◽  
Ananish Chaudhuri ◽  
Quentin Atkinson

A popular view, supported by several studies, is that liberals are more concerned than conservatives about COVID-19. This is puzzling given the strong pandemic responses from some conservative nations, and the well-established link between conservatism and threat-sensitivity. We argue a resolution is provided by the dual evolutionary foundations of political ideology, which track trade-offs between: (1) threat-driven group conformity (social conservatism or right-wing authoritarianism [RWA]) vs. individual autonomy (social progressivism); and (2) a competitive motivation for hierarchy (economic conservatism or social dominance orientation [SDO]) vs. cooperation (economic progressivism). Using longitudinal data from a UK sample (n=433), we show that social (RWA), but not economic (SDO), conservatism significantly increased following the pandemic, and self-reported worry about the pandemic predicts this effect. Moreover, both social conservatives and economic progressives display strong responses to COVID-19, but for different reasons. While social conservatives generally display more worried and conformist/norm-enforcing responses, economic progressives display more cooperative, empathic responses and only worried or conformist/norm-enforcing responses related to empathy. These findings provide an explanation for apparently inconsistent results of prior work, support the dual foundations model of political ideology, and offer insight into divergent motives across the ideological landscape that may be useful for managing pandemic response.


2021 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 550-567
Author(s):  
John R. Kerr ◽  
Marc S. Wilson

Previous research has highlighted how ideological factors such as political self-identification, religiosity and conspiracy thinking influence our beliefs about scientific issues such as climate change and vaccination. Across three studies (combined N = 9,022) we expand on this line of inquiry to show for the first time that the ideological attitudes relating to authoritarianism and group-based dominance predict disagreement with the scientific consensus in several scientific domains. We show these effects are almost entirely mediated by varying combinations of ideological (political ideology, religiosity, free-market endorsement, conspiracy thinking) and science-specific (scientific knowledge, trust in scientists) constructs, depending on the scientific issue in question. Importantly, a general distrust of science and scientists emerges as the most consistent mediator across different scientific domains. We find that, consistent with previous research, the ideological roots of rejection of science vary across scientific issues. However, we also show that these roots may share a common origin in ideological attitudes regarding authority and equality.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jahnavi R. Delmonico ◽  
Erin Michelle Buchanan

This study examined the potential for a predictive relationship between political conservatism and change detection. Research on the visual system has revealed a general tendency to overlook changes in a stationary scene when two versions of it are displayed alternately with a masking slide, known as the flicker paradigm. We examined whether political conservatism and various related measures predicted whether and how quickly changes were detected during a flicker paradigm task. Measures of interest were conservatism as measured by the Social and Economic Conservatism scale (Everett, 2013), openness as measured by the short form of the Big Five Inventory (John, Donahue & Kentle, 1991), authoritarianism as measured by the Right-Wing Authoritarianism scale (Altemeyer, 2006), political party, and a single bipolar conservatism scale. Despite predictions that greater conservatism and authoritarianism would shorten response latencies, authoritarianism appeared to lengthen the time it took to identify a change, while social conservatism shortened it. Openness and other forms of conservatism did not demonstrate significant predictive relationships. Implications of this pattern are discussed.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mathew Marques ◽  
Norman T. Feather ◽  
Darren E. J. Austin ◽  
Chris G Sibley

Individuals occupying high-status positions are sometimes victims of the tall poppy syndrome where people want to see them cut down to size. These attitudes reflect a tension between achievement, authority, and equality. In a pre-registered study (Study 1: N = 47,951), and a replication (Study 2: N = 5,569), of two representative New Zealand samples we investigated how social dominance orientation, right-wing authoritarianism, political ideologies and self-esteem predicted favoring the fall of the tall poppy. Novel findings showed individuals high in social dominance orientation favored the fall of the tall poppy. In both studies, high authoritarian aggression and submission, and low conventionalism (in Study 1 only) were also associated with negative tall poppy attitudes. So too were individuals with lower self-esteem and who were less conservative in their political ideology. These findings advance our understanding of how group-based hierarchy and inequality relate to attitudes towards individuals in high status positions.


2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Joscha Stecker ◽  
Paul C. Bürkner ◽  
Jens H. Hellmann ◽  
Steffen Nestler ◽  
Mitja D. Back

The importance of first impressions for various intrapersonal, social and societal outcomes is well established. First impressions towards refugees as individual members of one of the most heatedly discussed social groups in Western societies should play a key role in facilitating or impeding successful social integration. However, this issue is currently underexplored. To help understand first impressions towards refugee individuals, we conducted two studies, in which German perceivers (total N = 938) evaluated 60 (Study 1) or 48 (Study 2) male target photos of Western individuals (presented as Germans) and Middle Eastern individuals (presented as refugees). In Study 2, we included information about targets’ religious affiliations (Christian, Muslim) and religiousness (weakly religious, devout). Targets’ facial characteristics (physical attractiveness, smiling) were coded, and perceiver attitudes (right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, right-wing political ideology) were assessed. Results showed (a) no overall devaluation of refugees or Muslims, (b) strong effects of target attractiveness and smiling on evaluations across individuals of different group affiliations, (c) strong effects of perceiver attitudes towards refugees and Muslims, and (d) no interactive effects of perceiver attitudes and target cues on evaluations. It is important to note that these results should not be interpreted as any doubt about the profound experiences of discrimination and prejudices faced by minorities such as refugees. Instead, they underline the utility of an individual differences approach to better understand the circumstances under which devaluations of minoritized individuals suchs as refugees are amplified or reduced.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joscha Stecker ◽  
Paul - Christian Bürkner ◽  
Jens Hellmann ◽  
Steffen Nestler ◽  
Mitja Back

The importance of first impressions for various intrapersonal, social and societal outcomes is well established. Although, first impressions towards refugees as individual members one of the most heatedly discussed social groups in Western societies, should play a key role in facilitating or impeding successful social integration, this issue is currently underexplored. To help understanding first impressions towards refugee individuals, we conducted two studies, in which German perceivers (total N = 938) evaluated 60 (Study 1) and 48 (Study 2) male target photos of Western individuals (presented as Germans) and Middle Eastern individuals (presented as refugees). In Study 2, we included information about targets’ religious affilliations (Christian, Muslim) and religiousness (weakly religious, devout). Targets’ facial characteristics (physical attractiveness, smiling) were coded, and perceiver attitudes (right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, political ideology) were assessed. Results showed (a) no overall devaluation of refugees or Muslims, (b) strong effects of target attractiveness and smiling on evaluations across individuals of different group affiliations, (c) strong effects of perceiver attitudes towards refugees and Muslims, and (d) no interactive effects of perceiver attitudes and target cues on evaluations. Together, these findings underline the utility of an individual difference approach to better understand evaluations of refugees.


2006 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 117-126 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nazar Akrami ◽  
Bo Ekehammar

Extending previous research on the relation of Big-Five personality with right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation, we examined the relationships of Big-Five facet scores rather than factor scores. The results (N = 332) of stepwise regression analyses showed that Openness to Experience was the only significant predictor of right-wing authoritarianism at the factor level, whereas Values and Ideas were significant predictors at the facet level. A similar analysis of social dominance orientation showed that Agreeableness and Openness to Experience contributed significantly to the prediction at the factor level, whereas Tender-Mindedness and Values were the best significant predictors at the facet level. The prediction based on facet scores was more accurate than the prediction based on factor scores. A random split of the sample confirmed the robustness of the findings. The results are discussed against the background of the personality and the social psychology approaches to explaining individual differences in prejudice.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document