Authoritarian personality
The authoritarian personality is a
Historical origins
In his 1941 book
In
In human psychological development, the formation of the authoritarian personality occurs within the first years of a child's life, strongly influenced and shaped by the parents' personalities and the organizational structure of the child's family; thus, parent-child relations that are "hierarchical, authoritarian, [and] exploitative" can result in a child developing an authoritarian personality.[9] Authoritarian-personality characteristics are fostered by parents who have a psychological need for domination, and who harshly threaten their child to compel obedience to conventional behaviors. Moreover, such domineering parents also are preoccupied with social status, a concern they communicate by having the child follow rigid, external rules. In consequence of such domination, the child suffers emotionally from the suppression of his or her feelings of aggression and resentment towards the domineering parents, whom the child reverently idealizes, but does not criticize. Such personalities may also be related to studies in preschool children of personality and political views as reported by scientists in 2006 which concluded that some children described as being "somewhat dominating" were later found, as adults, to be "relatively liberal", and those described as "relatively over-controlled" were later found, as adults, to be "relatively conservative"; in the words of the researchers,[10]
Preschool children who 20 years later were relatively liberal were characterized as: developing close relationships, self-reliant, energetic, somewhat dominating, relatively under-controlled, and resilient. Preschool children subsequently relatively conservative at age 23 were described as: feeling easily victimized, easily offended, indecisive, fearful, rigid, inhibited, and relatively over-controlled and vulnerable.
Links to gender inequality
According to a study by Brandt and Henry, there is a direct correlation between the rates of gender inequality and the levels of authoritarian ideas in the male and female populations. It was found that in countries with less gender equality where individualism was encouraged and men occupied the dominant societal roles, women were more likely to support traits such as obedience which would allow them to survive in an authoritarian environment and less likely to encourage ideas such as independence and imagination. In countries with higher levels of gender equality, men held less authoritarian views. It is theorized that this occurs due to the stigma attached to individuals who question the cultural norms set by the dominant individuals and establishments in an authoritarian society as a way to prevent the psychological stress caused by the active ostracizing of the stigmatized individuals.[11]
Modern models
C.G. Sibley and J. Duckitt reported that more recent research has produced two more effective scales of measurement for predicting prejudice and other characteristics associated with authoritative personalities. The first scale is called the Right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) and the second is called the social dominance orientation (SDO).[12]
The research of Jost, Glaser,
The research on ideology, politics, and racist prejudice, by John Duckitt and Chris Sibley, identified two types of authoritarian worldview: (i) that the social world is dangerous, which leads to right-wing authoritarianism; and (ii) that the world is a ruthlessly competitive jungle, which leads to social dominance orientation.[15] In a meta-analysis of the research, Sibley and Duckitt explained that the social-dominance orientation scale helps to measure the generalization of prejudice and other authoritarian attitudes that can exist within social groups. Although both the right-wing authoritarianism scale and the social-dominance orientation scale can accurately measure authoritarian personalities, the scales usually are not correlated.[12]
Hetherington and Weiler describe the authoritarian personality as one that has a greater need for order, and less willingness to tolerate ambiguity as well as a tendency to rely on established authorities to provide that order. They acknowledge that while everyone seeks to bring some semblence of order to their world, non-authoritarian personalities are more likely to use concepts like fairness and equality, instead of the time-honored texts, conventions or leaders that are more common among authoritarian personalities. They also note that almost everyone becomes more authoritarian when they feel threat, anxiety or fatigue, as the emotional, reactive parts of the brain crowd out cognitive abilities. They also assert that scholars do not know whether to consider authoritarianism a personality trait, an attitude or an ideology.[2]
Prevalence
Western countries
In 2021, Morning Consult (an American data intelligence company) published the results of a survey measuring the levels of authoritarianism in adults in America and seven other Western countries. The study used Bob Altemeyer's right-wing authoritarianism scale, but they omitted the following two statements from Altemeyer's scale: (1) "The established authorities generally turn out to be right about things, while the radicals and protestors are usually just "loud mouths" showing off their ignorance"; and (2) "Women should have to promise to obey their husbands when they get married." Morning Consult's scale thus had just 20 items, with a score range of 20 to 180 points. Morning Consult found that 25.6% of American adults qualify as "high RWA" (scoring between 111 and 180 points), while 13.4% of American adults qualify as "low RWA" (scoring 20 to 63 points).[16]
Low RWA | High RWA | |
---|---|---|
US | 13.4% | 25.6% |
UK | 13.6% | 10.4% |
Germany | 17.4% | 6.7% |
France | 10.2% | 10.7% |
Spain | 17.9% | 9.2% |
Italy | 17.9% | 12.9% |
Australia | 17.1% | 12.9% |
Canada | 21.3% | 13.4% |
United States
In a 2009 book, Marc J. Hetherington and Jonathan D. Weiler identified evangelical Christians as the most authoritarian of voting blocs in the United States. Furthermore, the former Confederate states (i.e. "the South") showed higher levels of authoritarianism than the rest. Rural populations tend to be more authoritarian than urban ones. The authoritarianism levels of these demographics were assessed with four items that appeared in the 2004 American National Election Studies survey:[8]
- Please tell me which one you think is more important for a child to have: INDEPENDENCE or RESPECT FOR ELDERS
- Please tell me which one you think is more important for a child to have: CURIOSITY or GOOD MANNERS
- Please tell me which one you think is more important for a child to have: OBEDIENCE or SELF-RELIANCE
- Please tell me which one you think is more important for a child to have: BEING CONSIDERATE or WELL BEHAVED
Group | Mean authoritarianism (2004 data)[8] |
---|---|
Religion | |
Evangelical Protestant | 0.709 |
Catholic | 0.571 |
Mainline Protestant | 0.530 |
Secular | 0.481 |
Jewish | 0.383 |
Church Attendance | |
Weekly or More | 0.689 |
Less than Weekly | 0.549 |
Region | |
South[a] | 0.657 |
Non-south | 0.547 |
Population density | |
Rural | 0.603 |
Small town | 0.584 |
Suburb | 0.524 |
Large City | 0.502 |
Inner City | 0.549 |
Education | |
Less than High School | 0.754 |
High School Degree | 0.657 |
Some College | 0.590 |
College Degree | 0.505 |
Graduate Degree | 0.373 |
See also
- Anti-authoritarianism
- Authoritarian leadership style
- Coercion
- Conformity
- Control freak
- Dominance hierarchy
- Disciplinarian
- Fascist (insult)
- Fear of crime
- Freudo-Marxism
- Homo Sovieticus / Mankurt
- Narcissistic personality disorder
- Obsessive-compulsive personality disorder
- Police brutality
- Psychological abuse
- Social dominance theory
- Stanford prison experiment
- Sycophancy
- Tyranny of the majority
- Workplace bullying
References
- ^ The states that constituted the now-defunct Confederacy.
- ^ Baars, J. & Scheepers, P. (1993). "Theoretical and Methodological Foundations of the Authoritarian Personality". Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 29, pp. 345–353.
- ^ a b Hetherington; Weiler (2009). Authoritarianism and Polarization in American Politics, p. 34-36
- ISBN 978-0-06-030150-7.
- ^ Shils, E. A. (1954) Authoritarianism: "Right and left." In R. Christie & M. Iahoda (Eds.), Studies in the scope and method of the "authoritarian personality." New York: Free Press of Glencoe. 1954. pp. 24-49.
- JSTOR 2087803.
- S2CID 257086593.
- S2CID 146317479.
- ^ a b c Hetherington; Weiler (2009). Authoritarianism and Polarization in American Politics, p. 47-48, 59
- ^ Adorno et al., The Authoritarian Personality (1950) pp. 482–484.
- . Retrieved 22 February 2022.
- S2CID 14257738.
- ^ S2CID 5156899.
- ^ Altemeyer, Bob (1998). "The Other 'Authoritarian Personality'", Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, pp. 30, 47–91.
- ^ McCrae and Costa (1997). Conceptions and Correlates of Openness to Experience. Handbook of Personality Psychology, R. Hogan, J. Johnson, S. Briggs, Eds). pp. 835–847.
- S2CID 143766574.
- ^ Rachel Vengalia; Laura Maxwell (28 June 2021). "How We Conducted Our International Study on Right-Wing Authoritarianism". Morning Consult. Retrieved 3 Jan 2022.
Bibliography
- Marc J. Hetherington; Jonathan D. Weiler (2009). Authoritarianism and Polarization in American Politics. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-511-65165-6.
External links
- 2010 audio discussion on authoritarianism with Bob Altemeyer and Jonathan Shockley on WBAI[relevant?]