AUTORITARIAN PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL BELIEFS

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription Access

Abstract


Background. The review is devoted to the analysis of the categories «Authoritarian Personality» and «Social Beliefs», as this determines the social attitudes of a person: it is believed that belief in a «dangerous world» reliably predicts right-wing authoritarianism, and belief in a «competitive world» is oriented toward social domination. The aim of the work was the analysis of publications on the issue of the authoritarian personality syndrome and factors affecting it, for the timely identification of individual psychological characteristics and possible psychocorrection for the purpose of effective learning in the course of the educational process in young people. The study is relevant due to the fact that authoritarianism and social attitudes are subject to monitoring due to changes in the conditions of society. Materials and methods. When conducting a study, scientific publications in open press materials were used, which are contained in domestic and foreign databases, they were selected in accordance with the purpose of the study. Results. It is shown that people who adhere to the worldview of the «competitive world» tend to maintain group-based dominance; people who adhere to the «dangerous world» theory tend to adhere to social cohesion, collective security and traditions. Discussion. There is another version of authoritarianism, authoritarianism based on traditional values. However, where society is largely secular, and the human condition is comfortable, the degree of religiosity is minimal. Conclusion. Right-wing authoritarianism and a focus on social dominance are predictors of generalized prejudice and ethnocentrism, therefore monitoring these indicators is important as determining the function of an individual›s adaptation to society (1 figure, bibliography: 57 refs).

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

I M Uliukin

S. M. Kirov Military Medical Academy of the Russian Defense Ministry

Saint Petersburg, Russia

D V Kostin

S. M. Kirov Military Medical Academy of the Russian Defense Ministry

Saint Petersburg, Russia

N V Kiseleva

S. M. Kirov Military Medical Academy of the Russian Defense Ministry

Saint Petersburg, Russia

V V Yusupov

S. M. Kirov Military Medical Academy of the Russian Defense Ministry

Saint Petersburg, Russia

A V Berezovskii

S. M. Kirov Military Medical Academy of the Russian Defense Ministry

Saint Petersburg, Russia

References

  1. Duckitt J., Wagner C., du Plessis I., Birum I. The psychological bases of ideology and prejudice: testing a dual process model. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2002; 83 (1): 75-93.
  2. Federico C. M., Hunt C. V., Ergun D. Political expertise, social worldviews, and ideology: translating «competitive jungles» and «dangerous worlds» into ideological reality. Social Justice Research. 2009; 22 (2): 259-79.
  3. Jugert P., Duckitt J. A motivational model of authoritarianism: integrating personal and situational determinants. Political Psychology. 2009; 30 (5): 693-719.
  4. Van Hiel A., Cornelis I., Roets A. The intervening role of social worldviews in the relationship between the five-factor model of personality and social attitudes. European Journal of Personality. 2007; 21 (2): 131-48.
  5. Гулевич О. А., Аникеенок О. А., Безменова И. К. Социальные верования: адаптация методик Дж. Даккита. Психология. Журнал Высшей школы экономики. 2014; 11 (2): 68-89 @@ Gulevich O. A., Anikeenok O. A., Bezmenova I. K. Social Beliefs: Adaptation of J. Duckitt’s Scales. Psychology. Journal of the Higher School of Economics. 2014; 11 (2): 68-89.
  6. McHoskey J. W. Authoritarianism and ethical ideology. J. Soc. Pнsychol. 1996; 136 (6): 709-17.
  7. Satherley N., Sibley C. G. A Dual Process Model of attitudes toward immigration: Predicting intergroup and international relations with China. Int. J. Intercult. Rel. 2016; 53: 72-82.
  8. Sibley C. G., Duckitt J. The dual process model of ideology and prejudice: a longitudinal test during a global recession. J. Soc. Psychol. 2013; 153 (4): 448-66.
  9. Adorno T. W., Frenkel-Brunswik E., Levinson D. J., Sanford R. N. The authoritarian personality. New York: Harper and Row; 1950.
  10. Altemeyer B. Right-Wing Authoritarianism. Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada: University of Manitoba Press; 1981. 352.
  11. Hodson G., Dhont K. The person-based nature of prejudice: Individual difference predictors of intergroup negativity. European Review of Social Psychology. 2015; 26 (1): 1-42.
  12. Altemeyer B. Enemies of freedom. Understanding right-wing authoritarianism. Mississauga: Jossey-Bass Inc.; 1988. 370.
  13. Altemeyer B. The Authoritarian Specter. Harvard: Harvard University Press; 1996. 384.
  14. McFarland S. G., Ageyev V. S., Abalakina-Paap M. Authoritarianism in the former Soviet Union. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1992; 63 (6): 1004-10.
  15. Pratto F., Sidanius J., Levin S. Social dominance theory and the dynamics of intergroup relations: Taking stock and looking forward. Eur. Rev. Soc. Psychol. 2006; 17(1): 271-320.
  16. Furnham A. Personality, Emotional and Self-Assessed Intelligence and Right Wing Authoritarianism. Psychology. 2015; 6 (16): 2113-8.
  17. Duckitt J., Sibley C. G. Personality, Ideology, Prejudice, and Politics: a Dual-Process Motivational Model. J. Pers. 2010; 78 (6): 1861-94.
  18. Pettigrew T. F. In Pursuit of Three Theories: Authoritarianism, Relative Deprivation, and Intergroup Contact. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2016; 67 (1): 1-21.
  19. Brandt M. J, Henry P. J. Gender inequality and gender differences in authoritarianism. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 2012; 38 (10): 1301-15.
  20. Amunts K., Kedo O., Kindler M., Pieperhoff P., Mohlberg H., Shah N. J., Habel U., Schneider F., Zilles K. Cytoarchitectonic mapping of the human amygdala, hippocampal region and entorhinal cortex: intersubject variability and probability maps. Anat. Embryol. (Berl). 2005; 210 (5-6): 343-52.
  21. Somerville L. H., Whalen P. J., Kelley W. M. Human bed nucleus of the stria terminalis indexes hypervigilant threat monitoring. Biol. Psychiatry. 2010; 68 (5): 416-24.
  22. Pedersen W. S., Muftuler L. T., Larson C. L. Conservatism and the neural circuitry of threat: economic conservatism predicts greater amygdala - BNST connectivity during periods of threat vs safety. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci. 2018; 13 (1): 43-51.
  23. Ruffman T., Wilson M., Henry J. D., Dawson A., Chen Y., Kladnitski N., Myftari E., Murray J., Halberstadt J., Hunter J. A. Age differences in right-wing authoritarianism and their relation to emotion recognition. Emotion. 2016; 16 (2): 226-36.
  24. Huddy L. Contrasting Theoretical Approaches to Intergroup Relations. Political Psychology. 2004; 25 (6): 947-67.
  25. Ho A. K., Sidanius J., Pratto F., Levin S., Thomsen L., Kteily N., Sheehy-Skeffington J. Social Dominance Orientation: Revisiting the Structure and Function of a Variable Predicting Social and Political Attitudes. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 2012; 38 (5): 583-606.
  26. Pratto F., Sidanius J., Stallworth L. M., Malle B. F. Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1994; 67 (4): 741-63.
  27. Akrami N., Ekehammar B. Right-Wing Authoritarianism and Social Dominance Orientation. Journal Individual Differences. 2006; 27 (3): 117-26.
  28. Kuşdil M. E., Akoğlu S. Ç. Relationships Among Social Dominance Orientation, Social Axioms, and Values. Social Behavior and Personality. Int. J. 2014; 42 (8): 1395-407.
  29. Ho A. K., Sidanius J., Kteily N., Sheehy-Skeffington J., Pratto F., Henkel K. E., Foels R., Stewart A. L. The nature of social dominance orientation: Theorizing and measuring preferences for intergroup inequality using the new SDO₇ scale. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2015; 109 (6): 1003-28.
  30. Duckitt J. A dual-process cognitive-motivational theory of ideology and prejudice. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 2001; 33: 41-113.
  31. Feather N. T., McKee I. R. Values, Right-Wing Authoritarianism, Social Dominance Orientation, and Ambivalent Attitudes Toward Women. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 2012; 42 (10): 2479-504.
  32. Radkiewicz P. Another look at the duality of the dual-process motivational model. On the role of axiological and moral origins of right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation. Pers. Indiv. Differ. 2016; 99: 106-12.
  33. Chirumbolo A., Leone L., Desimoni M. The interpersonal roots of politics: Social value orientation, socio-political attitudes and prejudice. Pers. Indiv. Differ. 2016; 91: 144-53.
  34. Hodson G., MacInnis C. C., Busseri M. A. Bowing and kicking: Rediscovering the fundamental link between generalized authoritarianism and generalized prejudice. Pers. Indiv. Differ. 2017; 104: 243-51.
  35. Van Ijzendoom M. H. Moral judgment, authoritarianism, and ethnocentrism. J. Soc. Psychol. 1989; 129 (1): 37-45.
  36. Wilson M. S. Social dominance and ethical ideology the end justifies the means? J. Soc. Psychol. 2003; 143 (5): 549-58.
  37. Peterson B. E., Smirles K. A., Wentworth, P. A. Generativity and authoritarianism: implications for personality, political involvement, and parenting. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1997; 72 (5): 1202-16.
  38. Krauss S. W. Romanian authoritarianism 10 years after communism. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 2002; 28 (9): 1255-64.
  39. McHoskey J. W. Case closed? On the John F. Kennedy assassination: biased assimilation of evidence and attitude polarization. Basic Appl. Soc. Psych. 1995; 17 (3): 395-409.
  40. Lehmiller J. J., Schmitt M. T. Group domination and inequality in context: evidence for the unstable meanings of social dominance and authoritarianism. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 2007; 37 (6): 704-24.
  41. McFarland S. G. On the eye of war: authoritarianism, social dominance, and American students’ attitudes toward attacking Iraq. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 2005; 31 (3): 360-7.
  42. Реnа Y., Sidanius J. U. S. patriotism and ideologies of group dominance: a tale of asymmetry. J. Soc. Psychol. 2002; 142 (6): 782-90.
  43. Sibley C. G., Duckitt J. Big-five personality, social worldviews, and ideological attitudes: further tests of a dual process cognitive-motivational model. J. Soc. Psychol. 2009; 149 (5): 545-61.
  44. Sibley C. G., Duckitt J. The personality bases of ideology: a one-year longitudinal study. J. Soc. Psychol. 2010; 150 (5): 540-59.
  45. Butler J. C. Authoritarianism and fear responses to pictures: the role of social differences. Int. J. Psychol. 2013; 48 (1): 18-24.
  46. Kandler C., Lewis G. J., Feldhaus L. H., Riemann R. The genetic and environmental roots of variance in negativity toward foreign nationals. Behav. Genet. 2015; 45 (2): 181-99.
  47. Lee I. C. Endorsement of sexist ideology in Taiwan and the United States: social dominance orientation, right-wing authoritarianism, and deferential family norms. Int. J. Psychol. 2013; 48 (3): 254-62.
  48. Peterson B. E., Zurbriggen E. L. Gender, sexuality, and the authoritarian personality. J. Pers. 2010; 78 (6): 1801-26.
  49. Asbrock F., Kauff M. Authoritarian Disbeliefs in Diversity. J. Soc. Psychol. 2015; 155 (6): 553-8.
  50. Нурутдинов И. И. Методологические проблемы концептуализации понятия «ваххабизм». Вестник экономики, права и социологии. 2015; 3: 246-50 @@ Nurutdinov I. I. Methodological Problems of Conceptualization of the Notion of «Wahhabism». Vestnik ekonomiki, prava i sotsiologii. 2015; 3: 246-50.
  51. Kinnvall C. Globalization and religious nationalism: Self-identity, and the search for ontological security. Polit. Psychol. 2004; 25 (5): 741-67.
  52. Diener E., Tay L., Myers D. G. The religion paradox: If religion makes people happy, why are so many dropping out? J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2011; 101 (6): 1278-90.
  53. Zuckerman P. Atheism and societal health. In: Bullivant S., Ruse M., eds. Oxford handbook of atheism. N. Y.: Oxford University Press; 2013.
  54. Kay A. C., Shepherd S., Blatz C. W., Chua S. N., Galinsky A. D. For God (or) country: the hydraulic relation between government instability and belief in religious sources of control. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2010; 99 (5): 725-39.
  55. Руденко М. Н., Алимова Д. А. Проблема функциональной роли религии в современном обществе. Вестник Астрахан. гос. технич. университета. 2017; 1 (63): 114-20 @@ Rudenko M. N., Alimova D. A. The problem of the functional role of religion in modern society. Vestnik Astrakhan. State Technical University. 2017; 1 (63): 114-20.
  56. Ягияев И. И. Взаимосвязь веры в опасный мир с религиозностью, атеизмом и религиозным индифферентизмом личности. Психология. Журнал Высшей школы экономики. 2015; 12 (3): 165-74 @@ Yagiyayev I. I. Interrelation of Belief in Dangerous World with Religiosity, Atheism and Religious Indifferentism of Personality. Psychology. Journal of the Higher School of Economics. 2015; 12 (3): 165-74.
  57. Dhont K., Hodson G., Leite A. C. Common Ideological Roots of Speciesism and Generalized Ethnic Prejudice: The Social Dominance Human - Animal Relations Model (SD-HARM). Eur. J. Pers. 2016; 30 (6): 507-22.

Statistics

Views

Abstract - 37

PDF (Russian) - 6

Cited-By


PlumX

Dimensions

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2019 Военно-медицинская академия имени С.М.Кирова

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies