Authoritarianism in the former Soviet Union.

Abstract

Two studies examined the relevance of the authoritarian personality in the Soviet Union. In a 1991 Moscow quota sample, authoritarianism strongly predicted support for reactionary leaders and military actions and opposition to democratic and non-Russian leaders and to democratic activities. The positive correlation between authoritarianism and support for Marxist-Leninist ideology was significant but lower than in 1989. Consistent with the theory that conventionalism is a central attribute of authoritarianism, Russian authoritarianism predicted support for equalitarianism and opposition to laissez-faire individualism, whereas in a comparison American sample these relationships were reversed. The lower Russian consistencies on scales measuring norms of justice are interpreted as differences in how Soviets and Americans relate abstract thought and values to particular policies and activities.

Psychological motives and political orientation--The left, the right, and the rigid: Comment on Jost et al. (2003).

“…McFarland et al's (1992) findings also cast doubt on the idea that authoritarianism generally goes along with the endorsement of inequality. Although the authoritarian personalities in Russia were psychologically similar to those in the West, this was not the case regarding inequalities.…”

“…Moreover, McFarland et al (1992) suggested that the authoritarian personality in the Soviet Union, although procommunist, was psychologically the same as Western authoritarianism. .…”

“…Both Soviet and Western authoritarianism have appeared to embrace a common conventionalism (including fears of dissidence, free thought, and personal liberty), authoritarian submission, and authoritarian aggression. (p. 1005) In all cases, the intensified loyalty to cultural norms was "coupled with hostility directed toward the culture's deviants, malcontents, and enemies and with support for the use of force against those who are perceived as threats to the accepted order" (McFarland et al, 1992(McFarland et al, , p. 1008.…”

Does extreme political ideology predict conspiracy beliefs, economic evaluations and political trust? Evidence from Sweden

“…However, further empirical research has shown that some of these characteristics may need to be attributed to both leftand right-wing extreme ideological rigidity, as for instance suggested by findings that in the former Soviet Union, authoritarian tendencies are associated with increase in left-wing orientation (McFarland et al, 1992). Indeed, a recent large-scale sample in the Netherlands reveals that both the left and right extremes are more fearful of socioeconomic developments than political moderates (van Prooijen, Krouwel, Boiten, & Eendebak, 2015).…”

Ideological bases of institutional trust in eastern and western europe and the effect of motivated social cognition

“…Research conducted in postsocialist countries shows that conventionality motivation (Hadarics, 2016) and psychological variables related to this kind of motivation, like authoritarianism (Korzeniowski, 2006;McFarland, Ageyev, & Abalakina-Paap, 1992;Todosijević, 2008), need for closure (Golec, 2002;Kossowska & Van Hiel, 2003), or conservation values (Duriez, Van Hiel, & Kossowska, 2005) endorse the acceptance of paternalistic and egalitarian economic attitudes and beliefs, because these are the ideological elements in this region that can provide the feeling of certainty and predictability by their normative nature.…”