Prejudice measures index ideologies, not psychopathology

Evidence

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). — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 153

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to authoritarianism and social dominance orientation literature; parallels the earlier notes on ideology as organized, socially validated belief. — connects to: High F-scale scores without overt ethnocentrism were considered anomalous exceptions. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 1768
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years…, 153