Authoritarianism is an ideological belief system, not a psychodynamic disorder.
Evidence
Altemeyer (1981) has reconceptualized the authoritarian personality as being rooted in ideology, rather than psychodynamics. Right-Wing Authoritarianism (Altemeyer, 1981) assesses a tendency toward group conformity and the acceptance of conservative political ideologies that demean cultural outgroups. People high in Right-Wing Authoritarianism are hypervigilant toward perceived threats to the ingroup, and therefore (especially during difficult life conditions that threaten the ingroup) are likely to scapegoat outgroups. The other most prominent individual difference measure of prejudice, Social Dominance Orientation (Sidanius & Pratto, 1999), assesses a preference for group-based hierarchy. People high in Social Dominance Orientation seek to preserve established dominance hierarchies (which are threatened during times of social upheaval) and may scapegoat to restore ingroup dominance. — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 1602 (
#corroborates, via linked claim)
As Duckitt notes, neither authoritarianism nor the other most prominent individual difference measure of prejudice, social dominance orientation (Sidanius & Pratto, 1999), are related to indices of psychopathology (as Allport would have predicted); rather they are better conceived as individual differences in people’s belief in social and political attitudes or ideologies. Similarly, although Allport recognized the limitations of a scapegoat theory that focused on individuals’ lack of tolerance for frustration, he failed to recognize that scapegoat movements are often group-level phenomena, coordinated by adherence to a socially validated ideology (Glick). — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 153 (
#corroborates, via linked claim)
Authoritarianism and Social Dominance Orientation are strongly related to the mediator of scapegoating proposed here, endorsement of nationalistic and xenophobic political ideologies (Duckitt, ch. 24 this volume). Further, rather than indicating individual psychopathology, current research reveals these individual differences to be socialized belief systems (Duckitt, this volume), suggesting that cultures (as well as individuals) differ on these dimensions and therefore in their proneness to scapegoating (Staub, 1989). As Duckitt (this volume) notes, people’s endorsement of authoritarianism and social dominance may increase when the ingroup is threatened (authoritarianism) or the status of the ingroup is diminished (social dominance), increasing attraction to and social consensus in scapegoating. Thus, people who endorse these belief systems are likely to be prominent among the willing adherents of scapegoat movements (Staub, 1989). — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 1603 (
#corroborates, via linked claim)
Categorization
- XREF: connects to: Authoritarianism is not a single coherent psychological construct — Leonard S. Newman and Ralph Erber (eds.), Understanding Genocide: The Social…, 525; Right-wing authoritarianism describes psychological submission, not economic politics.; Authoritarianism is a learned ideology, not a personality pathology (+9 more)
Broader Connections
- Authoritarianism and SDO are ideologies, not psychopathologies
#corroborates(0.98) — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 153 - Authoritarianism and social dominance are ideologies, not psychopathologies
#corroborates(0.98) — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 1602 - Authoritarianism is a socialized cultural belief system, not a marker of individual pathology.
#corroborates(0.97) — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 1603 - Authoritarian prejudice is ideological, not rooted in psychodynamic conflict.
#corroborates(0.95) — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 1602 - Authoritarian prejudice stems from ideology-backed threat vigilance, not psychodynamic displacement.
#corroborates(0.93) — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 1602