Right-wing Authoritarianism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) is a theoretical psychological personality variable or "ideological attitude" allegedly found to a high degree in people who are authoritarian followers (Authoritarian leaders, on the other hand, tend to score highly in social dominance orientation.)(Source: Altemeyer, 1998)
Right-wing authoritarianism is defined as the co-existence of three attitudinal clusters in a person:
- Authoritarian submission — a high degree of submission to the authorities who are perceived to be established and legitimate in the society in which one lives.
- Authoritarian aggression — a general aggressiveness, directed against various persons, that is perceived to be sanctioned by established authorities.
- Conventionalism — a high degree of adherence to the social conventions that are perceived to be endorsed by society and its established authorities. (Source: Altemeyer, 1996, Chapter 1)
The "RWA" trait is measured by an attitude scale creatively named the RWA scale. The first item on the scale goes, "Our country desperately needs a mighty leader who will do what has to be done to destroy the radical new ways and sinfulness that are ruining us." Persons who strongly agree with this are showing a lot of authoritarian submission ("Our country desperately needs a mighty leader"), authoritarian aggression ("who will do what has to be done to destroy"), and conventionalism ("the radical new ways and sinfulness that are ruining us").
The "right-wing" in right-wing authoritarianism does not refer to someone's politics but to their personality. It means the person has a strong need to submit to those they consider the established authorities in society. Those authorities can have right-wing or left-wing political views. In North America, persons who score highly on the RWA scale tend to support conservative political parties when they take an interest in politics. But in the Soviet Union, high RWAs tended to support the Communist Party--which most people consider a very left-wing political movement. (Source: Altemeyer, 1996, Chapters 1 and 5) Another kind of personality, the "left-wing authoritarian," submits to authorities who want to overthrow the established authorities. But (perhaps naturally) it is harder to find such people. (Source: Altemeyer, 1996, Chapter 9).
Contents |
[edit] History of the RWA Theory
The RWA construct was inductively developed in the 1970s by Bob Altemeyer, who started with earlier conceptualizations of the authoritarian personality originated by the Frankfurt School, especially Theodor Adorno. Taking an empirical approach based on statistical analysis of various measures, he found that just three aspects of the many models of authoritarianism "hung together" at all well: authoritarian submission, authoritarian aggression and conventionalism.(Source: Altemeyer, 1981, Chapter 3) Testing various items led to a more precise understanding of these three elements, and to the RWA scale. At the time researchers assumed there was just one kind of authoritarian personality, who could be a follower or a leader. The discovery that followers and leaders were usually different kinds of authoritarians was based on research done by Sam McFarland. (Source: Altemeyer, 1998)
The RWA scale was modified over the years, as many items lost some of their social significance as society changed. The current version is 20 items long, and can be found at [1] This site contains a PDF version of an "accessible" book that Altemeyer published in 2006 at the suggestion of John Dean, describing the findings on the two kinds of authoritarian personalities, and showing the findings' relevance to contemporary America. (Dean had most astutely made this connection in his best seller, Conservatives Without Conscience.)
[edit] Significant Correlations
 |
This article has been nominated to be checked for its neutrality. Discussion of this nomination can be found on the talk page. |
Research has discovered a wide range of RWA scale relationships over the years, which can be organized into four general categories. (The Authoritarian Specter)
1: Faulty reasoning — RWAs are more likely to:
- Make many incorrect inferences from evidence.
- Hold contradictory ideas that result from a cognitive attribute known as compartmentalized thinking.
- Uncritically accept that many problems are ‘our most serious problem.’
- Uncritically accept insufficient evidence that supports their beliefs.
- Uncritically trust people who tell them what they want to hear.
- Use many double standards in their thinking and judgments.
2: Hostility Toward Outgroups — RWAs are more likely to:
- Weaken constitutional guarantees of liberty such as a Bill of Rights.
- Severely punish ‘common’ criminals in a role-playing situation.
- Admit they obtain personal pleasure from punishing such people.
- Be prejudiced and hostile against racial, ethnic, nationalistic, sexual, and linguistic minorities.
- Volunteer to help the government persecute almost anyone.
- Be mean-spirited toward those who have made mistakes and suffered.
3: Profound Character Attributes — RWAs are more likely to:
- Be dogmatic.
- Be zealots.
- Be hypocrites.
- Be absolutists
- Be bullies when they have power over others.
- Help cause and inflame intergroup conflict.
- Seek dominance over others by being competitive and destructive in situations requiring cooperation.
4: Blindness To One’s Own Failings And To The Failings Of Authority Figures Whom They Respect— RWAs are more likely to:
- Believe they have no personal failings.
- Avoid learning about their personal failings.
- Be highly self-righteous.
- Use religion to erase guilt over their acts and to maintain their self-righteousness.
RWA is also correlated with political conservatism — not so much at the level of ordinary voters, but with increasing strength as one moves from voters to activists to office holders, and then from lower- to higher-level officeholders. (The Authoritarian Specter). Scores on the RWA Scale predict many attitudes and behaviors related to conservatism as defined in the general culture at the time. For instance, the scale has correlated reliably with political party affiliation; reactions to Watergate; pro-capitalist attitudes; severity of jury sentencing decisions; punishment of deviants; racial prejudice; homophobia; religious orthodoxy; victim blaming; and acceptance of covert governmental activities such as illegal bugging, political harassment, denial of the right to assemble, and illegal drug raids (Altemeyer, 1981, 1988, 1996, 1998).
In one part of his summation, Altemeyer wrote that RWAs are more likely to be: "Conservative/Reform party (Canada) or Republican Party (United States) lawmakers who (1) have a conservative economic philosophy; (2) believe in social dominance; (3) are ethnocentric; (4) are highly nationalistic; (5) oppose abortion; (6) support capital punishment; (7) oppose gun-control legislation; (8) say they value freedom but actually want to undermine the Bill of Rights; (9) do not value equality very highly and oppose measures to increase it; (10) are not likely to rise in the Democratic party, but do so among Republicans." (The Authoritarian Specter)
Altemeyer's own statement about this may be worth noting (from p. 239 of "Enemies of Freedom"): "right-wing authoritarians show little preference in general for any political party," and their prevalence in the Republican party reflects the long term effects of point (10) above.
[edit] Early Development of RWA
Duckitt has suggested a model of attitude development for RWA in which punitive socialisation causes social conformity.[citation needed] This leads to a view of the world as a dangerous, dog-eat-dog place. This fits with RWA beliefs, which influence ingroup and outgroup attitudes.
[edit] Double-High Right Wing Authoritarianism
A person who scores highly on both the Social Dominance test and Right-Wing Authoritarian test would be classified as a "double-high authoritarian." These individuals have a better than average chance of becoming leaders of ordinary authoritarian followers, such as among the 'Religious Right." (Source: Altemeyer, 2006)
[edit] Connection with Social Dominance Orientation
RWA has been found to correlate only slightly with Social Dominance Orientation (SDO). Together they are strong predictors of a variety of prejudices such as sexism, racism, and heterosexism. The two measures can be thought of as two sides of the same coin: RWA provides submissive followers, and SDO provides power-seeking leaders. (Source: Altemeyer, 1998)
[edit] Further reading
- Altemeyer, Bob (1996). The Authoritarian Specter. Harvard University Press. ISBN 0-674-05305-2.
- Altemeyer, Bob (1998). "The other ‘authoritarian personality.’" In M. Zanna (Ed.) Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 30 (pp. 47–92). San Diego: Academic Press.
- Altemeyer, Bob (1981). Right-Wing Authoritarianism. University of Manitoba Press.
- Altemeyer, Bob (2006). The Authoritarians. Lulu.
- Martin, John Levi (2001). "The Authoritarian Personality, 50 Years Later: What Questions Are There for Political Psychology?". Political Psychology 22 (1): 1–26. doi:.
- Dean, John W. (2006). Conservatives without Conscience. Viking Adult. ISBN 0-670-03774-5.
