Psychopathology, Authoritarian Attitudes, and Prejudice

Schlachter, Anne; Duckitt, John

doi:10.1177/008124630203200201

Cited by 22 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…First, contrary to Van Hiel and De Clercq (), with the exception of Study 3 (Time 1), the present studies failed to demonstrate significantly negative cross‐sectional associations between authoritarianism and depression. In fact, in line with other studies that have looked at this cross‐sectional relationship (Butler, ; Schlachter & Duckitt, ), the present study generally failed to find any significant cross‐sectional association. In addition, the present studies failed to replicate previous findings that authoritarianism would buffer against the negative effects of psychological vulnerability factors (i.e.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…Mehrabian, ; Van Hiel & De Clercq, ) and depression (Butler, ; Mehrabian, ), other studies support the idea that authoritarian beliefs form a defence against unconscious impulses. In this respect, research found positive cross‐sectional relationships between authoritarianism and anal retentiveness indicators such as compulsivity (Freedman, Webster, & Sanford, ), a compulsive‐dependent personality (Schlachter & Duckitt, ), obsessionality (Kline & Cooper, ) and a reluctance to accept and express inner feelings (Wilson & Brazendale, ). In addition, with respect to depression, Van Hiel and De Clercq () reported a significant negative relationship.…”

Section: Authoritarianism Psychopathy Well‐being and Adjustmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Right–Wing Authoritarianism: Protective Factor against Or Risk Factor for Depression?

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Because the authoritarian personality was introduced to explain the rise of fascism during World War II, research focused on its ability to predict prejudice, leaving its associations with well‐being largely unexplored. Studies that did examine these associations yielded inconsistent results, and some authors even argued that authoritarianism buffers against the negative effects of psychological vulnerability factors (i.e. D‐type personality) and negative life events on well‐being, especially among people in an authoritarian environment. Using a cross‐sectional community sample (N = 1010), Study 1 failed to support the idea that authoritarianism relates to depressive symptoms and buffers against the negative effects of D‐type personality on depressive symptoms. Using a longitudinal college student sample (N = 499), Study 2 showed that authoritarianism did not moderate the effects of life events either and even predicted over‐time increases in depressive symptoms. Using a longitudinal high school sample (N = 590), Study 3 showed that this effect emerged regardless of degree of fit with the social environment (i.e. with family and friends). Taken together, results suggest that authoritarianism constitutes a risk factor for rather than a protective factor against depressive symptoms. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Authoritarianism Psychopathy Well‐being and Adjustmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Right–Wing Authoritarianism: Protective Factor against Or Risk Factor for Depression?

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our results also indirectly touch upon recent work on the impact of personality on right‐wing attitudes. More specifically, although Neuroticism is a broad personality factor that incorporates anxiety and threat proneness, it is only poorly or not significantly related to right‐wing attitudes (Schlachter & Duckitt, ; Sibley & Duckitt, ; Van Hiel et al., ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Internal and External Threat in Relationship With Right‐Wing Attitudes

Onraet

Hiel

Dhont

et al. 2013

Journal of Personality

110

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Document VersionAuthor's Accepted Manuscript This article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as doi: 10.1111/jopy.12011Accepted Article [Geef tekst op] [Geef tekst op] [Geef tekst op] © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. AbstractObjective. Previous studies on the relationship between threat and right-wing attitudes have tended to focus on either internal threat, emanating from one's private life, or external threat, originating from society. However, these studies failed to examine whether these types of threats constitute two distinctive dimensions and which of these threats is most closely related to right-wing attitudes.Method. In order to explore the dimensions underlying threat, a factor analysis on a variety of threat scales was conducted (Study 1; N = 300). Furthermore, in a meta-analysis (Study 2; total N = 22,086) and a questionnaire study in a large representative sample (Study 3, N = 800) the strength of the relationships of internal and external threat with right-wing attitudes were investigated.Results. The present studies revealed that internal and external threat can be considered as two distinct dimensions underlying threat. Moreover, whereas external threat yielded strong relationships with rightwing attitudes, internal threat only explained a minor part of the variance in these attitudes.Conclusion. External rather than internal threat underlies the relationship between threat and right-wing attitudes.Keywords: internal threat, external threat, right-wing ideological attitudes, authoritarianism Accepted Article [Geef tekst op] [Geef tekst op] [Geef tekst op] © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.From the early days of authoritarianism research, scholars have hypothesized that threat is related to right-wing attitudes (e.g., Adorno, Frenkel-Brunswik, Levinson, & Sanford, 1950). Studies have frequently reiterated this hypothesis over the years (e.g., Duckitt, 2001; Feldman & Stenner, 2003; Jost, Glaser, Kruglanski, & Sulloway, 2003; Sales, 1972 Sales, , 1973 Stenner, 2005; Wilson, 1973), focusing on both threat-inducing situations, such as threats emanating from terrorism and economic crises (e.g., Sales, 1972Sales, , 1973 Willer, 2004; Winter, 1996), and many different threat scales, which range from general (e.g., Davids, 1955; Endler & Shedlets, 1973) to highly specific, such as death anxiety (e.g., Landau et al., 2004). The diversity of these threats seems to reflect the belief of scholars that any form of threat can be a correlate of right-wing attitudes. However, one may justifiably wonder whether these various threat types are equally correlated to right-wing attitudes and, if not, which threat types are most closely related to these attitudes. Therefore, the aim of the present paper was to investigate whether different threat types yielded differential relations...

show abstract

“…Because SIT adopts a rather relativistic perspective on the self by focusing primarily on its context-dependent nature, it is logical from the SIT perspective that a variety of self-contents can give rise to feelings of adjustment and self-determination: When the social context of a person is in favor of discrimination and the individual person adopts discriminatory norms in his or her self, this creates a fit between the self and environment. In this situation, one may also receive positive social feedback from the ingroup and feel a sense of positive contribution to the group, resulting in higher self-esteem, higher adjustment, and possibly higher self-determination (Schlachter & Duckitt, 2002;Van Hiel & De Clercq, 2009). …”

Section: Intergroup Perspectives and Group Normsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can Intergroup Behaviors Be Emitted Out of Self-Determined Reasons? Testing the Role of Group Norms and Behavioral Congruence in the Internalization of Discrimination and Parity Behaviors

Amiot

Sansfaçon

Louis

et al. 2011

Pers Soc Psychol Bull

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bringing self-determination theory to understand why intergroup behaviors are emitted, two studies were conducted to investigate how group norms and individuals' congruence with these norms predicted self-determination to pursue two types of intergroup behaviors (parity and discrimination). Experiment 1 (N = 97) manipulated ingroup norms in favor of parity versus of discrimination and assessed the behavior participants displayed (congruent or incongruent with the norm) and their motivations for emitting this behavior. The manipulated norms significantly influenced group members' behaviors. When the ingroup norm was parity, participants whose behavior was congruent with this norm reported more self-determination to emit this behavior. When the ingroup norm was prodiscrimination, participants whose behavior was congruent with this norm were less self-determined. Experiment 2 (N = 139) replicated and extended these findings in a more conflictual intergroup setting. Results are discussed in light of motivational and intergroup theories.

show abstract

Psychopathology, Authoritarian Attitudes, and Prejudice

Cited by 22 publications

References 45 publications

Right–Wing Authoritarianism: Protective Factor against Or Risk Factor for Depression?

Right–Wing Authoritarianism: Protective Factor against Or Risk Factor for Depression?

Internal and External Threat in Relationship With Right‐Wing Attitudes

Can Intergroup Behaviors Be Emitted Out of Self-Determined Reasons? Testing the Role of Group Norms and Behavioral Congruence in the Internalization of Discrimination and Parity Behaviors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About