The study’s character types were built from political doctrines, not psychology.

Evidence

In no sense did the character types have a psychological basis, and they were not derived from psychoanalytic considerations in any way (e.g. according to the phases of psychosexual development). On the contrary, they were formulated on the basis of ideal-typical' differences in social and political views as represented by the German ideological’ parties. The radical attitude' was drawn from socialist-communist philosophy’ as the image of a particular ideal-typical' mental attitude to which the political doctrine was making its appeal. The compromise-orientated reformist attitude’ was drawn from liberal-reformist philosophy', and the authoritarian attitude’ from `anti-socialistauthoritarian philosophy’. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 705

Categorization

• DEFINE: Explains how the three character types (radical, reformist, authoritarian) were operationalized — useful for citing the study’s methodology.
• XREF: connects to: Editors had stripped the study’s socio-political analysis down to psychology alone — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: A History…, 676; The Orient studied by scholars is a political system of representations, not raw reality — Edward W. Said, Orientalism, 507; The F scale measured personality through questionnaires, not explicit ideology like the other scales. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 439

Broader Connections

• Editors had stripped the study’s socio-political analysis down to psychology alone #contradicts (0.95) — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination, 676
• The F scale measured personality through questionnaires, not explicit ideology like the other scales. #expands (0.80) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 439
• The Orient studied by scholars is a political system of representations, not raw reality #qualifies (0.75) — Edward W. Said, Orientalism, 507