Authoritarian prejudice stems from fear not displaced aggression according to Allport

Evidence

There are four interesting differences in Allport and Adorno et al.’s views of the authoritarian personality, all of which are relevant to subsequent research and theoretical developments on personality and prejudice. (1) For Allport, the fearfulness, inadequacy, and anxiety of the authoritarian was at the core of his or her prejudice, while for Adorno et al. it was displaced hostility and aggression. — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 2439 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

For Allport, the fearfulness, inadequacy, and anxiety of the authoritarian was at the core of his or her prejudice, while for Adorno et al. it was displaced hostility and aggression. … Allport suggested that social environmental factors, such as demagogy and the social context, interacting with personality, created prejudice and aggression by activating and directing the fearfulness, anxiety, and inadequacy of the authoritarian, whereas social factors were largely ignored by Adorno et al. … Allport hypothesized that a particular worldview, specifically that people are basically bad and that the social world is a dangerous and threatening place, is an important component of the authoritarian syndrome, while Adorno et al. did not. — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 2439 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Still, Allport’s ideas (compared to Adorno et al.’s) better captured the complexity revealed by later research. Most centrally, Allport’s view that fearfulness and a threat orientation are the motivational core of the authoritarian syndrome has been substantially confirmed, whereas Adorno et al.’s hypothesis of repressed aggression has not. Allport’s emphasis on fearfulness and insecurity also led him correctly to view a restricted, limited cognitive style as an essential aspect of this syndrome, whereas Adorno et al. did not. Allport also identified the “philosophy of life” of the social world as dangerous and threatening as an important component of the authoritarian syndrome, while Adorno et al. did not. And finally, Allport emphasized that social environmental uncertainties and threats interact with authoritarianism to elicit hostility toward particular groups and to activate support for authoritarian policies, while Adorno et al. largely ignored social environmental influences. — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 2487 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Authoritarian prejudice springs from fear while dominance prejudice springs from appetite — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology: Key Readings, 1016; Modern prejudice research shows Allport was right that environment activates authoritarian fear — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years…, 2484; Prejudice provides authoritarians a sanctioned outlet for aggression — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology: Key Readings, 563 (+10 more)

Broader Connections

• Allport attributed prejudice to fear and anxiety while Adorno traced it to displaced aggression #corroborates (0.97) — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 2439
• Allport saw anxiety at the core of authoritarianism while Adorno emphasized aggression #corroborates (0.96) — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 2439
• Fearfulness and threat orientation, not repressed aggression, drive authoritarianism #corroborates (0.93) — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 2487
• Allport’s threat-based account of authoritarianism beat Adorno’s repressed-aggression account empirically #corroborates (0.92) — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 2487
• Fear and self-righteousness together largely explain authoritarian aggression #complicates (0.75) — Bob Altemeyer, The Authoritarian Specter, 546