Authoritarianism and conservatism arise from needs to manage uncertainty and threat

Evidence

Jost et al.’s (2003) review found authoritarianism and conservatism to be strongly associated with measures of perceived social threat and fear, intolerance of uncertainty and ambiguity, low integrative complexity, low openness to experience, and needs for order, structure, and closure. They concluded that conservatism and authoritarianism are motivated by needs to control and manage uncertainty and threat. Research using Schwartz’s (1992) well-validated values inventory (developed to measure universal values that express basic human motivational goals) supports this conclusion. His conservation values of security, conformity, and tradition correlate strongly with RWA but not with SDO, while his power and self-enhancement values correlate with SDO but not with RWA (Altemeyer, 1998; Duriez & Van Hiel, 2002; McFarland & Adelson, 1996; McFarland, 1998). — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 2468

Research has also linked RWA and SDO to particular social motives and values. Jost et al.’s (2003) review found authoritarianism and conservatism to be strongly associated with measures of perceived social threat and fear, intolerance of uncertainty and ambiguity, low integrative complexity, low openness to experience, and needs for order, structure, and closure. They concluded that conservatism and authoritarianism are motivated by needs to control and manage uncertainty and threat. Research using Schwartz’s (1992) well-validated values inventory (developed to measure universal values that express basic human motivational goals) supports this conclusion. His conservation values of security, conformity, and tradition correlate strongly with RWA but not with SDO, while his power and self-enhancement values correlate with SDO but not with RWA (Altemeyer, 1998; Duriez & Van Hiel, 2002; McFarland & Adelson, 1996; McFarland, 1998). In sum, people high in RWA value security, order, and control whereas people high in SDO value power, dominance, and group enhancement. — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 2468

Categorization

• DEEPTHINKING: Splits prejudice psychology into two distinct motivational profiles — one fear/order-driven (RWA), one power-dominance-driven (SDO) — that map onto different life experiences and interventions.
• SEED: An essay on why ‘authoritarianism’ and ‘social dominance’ are conflated in public discourse even though they draw on opposite psychologists — fear-of-threat versus competitive-cynicism.
• XREF: Connects to the vault’s prejudice-psychology claims on right-wing authoritarianism and the Jost system-justification literature. — connects to: Republican democracy has authorial and editorial dimensions addressing different threats. — Adelin-Costin Dumitru, Forging the Resistive Republic: Social…, 7
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 2468