John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius — Political Psychology

1443 published claims from this book.

• A belief system is defined by how well one attitude predicts others
• A better measurement instrument resurrected a nearly dead research program.
• A chain of innocent-seeming steps can jointly produce evil
• A general Discussion section consolidates a program’s findings and works as a comprehension check
• A genuine norm change occurred without eliminating racial inequality or policy support
• A journal article’s structure mirrors the scientific process itself
• A legitimizing myth’s political impact depends on four measurable properties.
• A model that fits without being refutable explains nothing
• A Nazi psychologist reinterpreted synaesthesia as a degenerate perceptual trait
• A political label’s informational value depends on the actor’s understanding and actual system constraint
• A psychology of privilege cannot alone determine concrete political allegiances.
• A question design can distinguish genuine cynicism from vocabulary ignorance in survey respondents
• A representative 85 percent response rate makes elite interview samples trustworthy
• A research report’s structure mirrors the four-stage process of scientific investigation
• A series of individually innocent actions can combine into a morally outrageous act
• A single voting equation can discriminate between valence and dual-system theories
• A single year concentrated major national threats that spiked war expectations
• A smaller standing force with flexible production can outlast a larger one in war
• A social-mobility belief system assumes individuals can exit their group through personal effort.
• A subculture explanation still requires a coherence account.
• A terrorist’s psychic denial shaped the specific method of his violence
• A threatened dominant group shifts from paternalistic to openly hostile stereotypes
• A villain is judged evil partly by whether their evil nearly succeeded
• Absent salient victims, moral restraints on harmful action weaken
• Academic elites may romanticize terrorists out of bourgeois self-loathing
• Achieved status remains heavily dependent on ascribed group membership
• Acquiescence and disagreement are stable personality traits, not just measurement errors
• Acquiescence inflated but did not fully generate authoritarianism scale correlations
• Across two millennia humanity saw violent political disturbance about one year in four.
• Actors judge policy success by win-loss even when alternatives would be better gauges.
• Adaptation capacity shapes whether socioeconomic change produces political violence
• Administrations can rhetorically frame economic malaise as existential threat
• Adorno’s anti-Semitism scale coded Jews as both threateningly competitive and clannishly separate.
• Adult recollections of childhood are grossly inaccurate data sources.
• Affect toward social groups stays more stable than policy beliefs in mass publics
• Age, sex, and kinship hierarchies predate humans across primates.
• Agency is a chosen self-definition that becomes virtually irreversible under authority.
• Agenda setting may work through information recall and retention
• Agenda setting may work through information retention or through viewer rumination.
• Agenda-setting media effects hit the least-informed citizens hardest
• Agenda-setting research produced contradictory cross-sectional findings about media influence
• Aggregate correlations cannot reveal the belief structures of individuals
• Aggregate polling models cannot reveal how individual citizens change their views
• Aggregate reliability percentages can mask complete disagreement on individual coding decisions
• Aggregate time-series polling data cannot reveal how scandal affects individual citizens’ thinking
• Aggregate time-series research hides which citizens shift presidential support and why
• Aggression counts as authoritarian when authority sanctions it.
• Aggressors strip victims of human status to justify their own violence
• Agreement and disagreement biases are personality traits, not just measurement errors
• Alert viewers are better able to resist media’s agenda-setting priorities
• Alpha male primates often rise to dominance through ruling coalitions, not individual strength.
• Ambiguous environments let personality shape behavior while structured ones constrain it.
• Ambiguous roles give personalities more sway than structured ones do.
• Ambivalence is abhorred because it paralyzes approach-avoidance action
• American anti-Semites scored as rigid, conservative, and nationalistic
• American ethnic status rankings were unchanged despite the civil rights era.
• American intellectuals feared anticommunism itself more than communism in the early Cold War
• American intellectuals saw prejudice as a worse evil than communism
• Americans deny class’s relevance by attributing it to foreign societies
• Analysts prefer absolutes, easily quantified metrics, and familiar data over complex assessment
• Analysts prefer available data over data relevant to their questions
• Analysts substitute the measurable question of relative strength for the relevant one of sufficiency
• Antagonism to outgroups is a single generalized sentiment, not separate prejudices
• Anti-Semitic attitudes hide inside seemingly fair-minded item phrasing
• Antiblack affect is a consistent, stable engine of symbolic racism across studies
• Antiblack predispositions persist through slow socialization change
• Antiblack prejudice grew out of slavery rather than causing it.
• Antiblack prejudice in America followed slavery rather than preceding it
• Anticipated upward mobility is tempered by fear of losing old friendships
• Anxiety activates citizens’ political consciousness while enthusiasm engages their hearts
• Anxiety and enthusiasm are structurally separate emotional dimensions, not opposites.
• Anxiety and enthusiasm serve distinct, useful functions in political learning
• Anxiety drives careful attention while enthusiasm drives emotional involvement.
• Anxiety during campaigns boosts attention and learning; enthusiasm drives involvement and candidate preference.
• Anxiety functions as an interruption mechanism that reorients attention toward threats
• Anxiety in voters spurs information-seeking that can break old voting habits
• Any mass public under system collapse supports radical change promises without ideology
• APA membership shifted toward intraceptive divisions as threat declined
• Arbitrary-set discrimination primarily targets subordinate males, not women
• Arbitrary-set hierarchies emerge only once economic surplus is sustainable.
• Arbitrary-set hierarchies produce far more genocide than age or gender systems
• Arbitrary-set social hierarchies arise only where economic surplus is sustainable.
• Archival content analysis may measure rhetorical style rather than actual cognition
• Aristotle held that fear requires some faint hope of escape
• Arms control analysts equated fewer weapons with safety, ignoring stability
• Attitude changes from majority pressure are quick but temporary and shallow
• Attitude holders selectively adopt the issue frame that favors their position
• Attitude scale items resist perfect psychological reversal
• Attitudes on related but overlapping foreign-policy issues collapse into a single underlying dimension
• Attitudes toward equality derive from attitudes toward one’s own status.
• Authoritarian aggression ratchets upward after threat and does not recede.
• Authoritarian gullibility toward insiders and paranoia toward outsiders share one cause
• Authoritarian individuals resist introspection and psychotherapy during high social threat
• Authoritarian personality patterns are observable in children by age ten.
• Authoritarian personality traits co-correlate robustly except for status-concern and cognitive rigidity
• Authoritarian political systems can shape minds that preserve the status quo
• Authoritarian prejudice operates through Freudian projection of repressed sex and aggression onto minorities
• Authoritarian prejudice springs from fear while dominance prejudice springs from appetite
• Authoritarian psychodynamics have never been proven causally, only correlationally
• Authoritarian rule concentrates political impact in leaders’ personalities.
• Authoritarian systems amplify the personality effects of top leaders.
• Authoritarian traits may cohere as class norms rather than psychic dynamics
• Authoritarian traits may cohere from low education and SES, not psychodynamics
• Authoritarianism can only be diagnosed from what circumstances change a person’s beliefs.
• Authoritarianism is a property of belief-change triggers, not belief content itself
• Authoritarianism is defined by the weight given to unsupported authority opinions, not rationality.
• Authoritarianism is defined by which information induces attitude change
• Authoritarianism is the worldview of the uneducated in Western industrial societies
• Authoritarianism of the left was ignored until climate change made it palatable
• Authoritarianism rises during threatening historical periods and falls in calm ones
• Authoritarianism scales measure ideology, not underlying personality traits
• Authoritarianism tracks education and religiosity while social dominance does not.
• Authoritarians and social dominators endorse different rape myths
• Authoritarians hold demanding moral standards that make everyday life feel sinful.
• Authoritarians’ double standards stem from uncritical copying of authorities
• Awareness of an out-group alone suffices to trigger intergroup competition
• Awareness of inequality does not automatically produce support for equality policies.
• Background characteristics affect behavior only through psychological mediators
• Bad economic and wartime periods produce more deliberative democratic behavior than good ones
• Banality describes the perpetrators’ character but not their deeds, which transform them.
• Barrington Moore’s landed-class thesis fits eight cases but fails on extension
• Basic ideological schemas organize political cognition into rational behavior
• Becoming a group member, not violence, is the dominant motive for terrorist followers.
• Behavioral patterns over time best predict political action
• Belief in group hierarchy makes people see competition everywhere
• Belief in meritocracy yields psychological satisfactions beyond logical consistency
• Belief perseverance persists even when evidence establishing it is shown false
• Belief system coherence is socially, not logically, driven
• Belief systems are creative inventions of a tiny minority diffused as unexamined packages
• Belief systems vary in the range of objects they cover
• Belief-system constraints are primarily social, not logical or psychological.
• Beliefs about social permeability, not objective structure, shape whether people pursue mobility or change
• Beliefs in individual responsibility and just deserts subtly justify existing hierarchies.
• Beliefs supporting inequality or equality form distinct functional categories of legitimizing myths.
• Believed-in inferiority becomes self-fulfilling as people choose roles matching stereotypes.
• Berkeley researchers’ category labels begged the question by assuming the unprejudiced reports were truthful
• Black economic inequality relative to whites remained structurally fixed across multiple decades
• Black political advancement depended on protest and own-group organization.
• Black-white conflict shifted from ending formal exclusion to redistributing resources
• Black-white relations show contradictory simultaneous progress and deterioration
• Blame attribution determines whether grievances politicize or depoliticize
• Blind coders reliably scored integrative complexity with high interrater agreement
• Blocked economic opportunity can redirect individuals into negative identity roles.
• Blocked economic paths to positive identity can push individuals into negative identities
• Blocked positive distinctiveness converts competition into open conflict
• Both deprivation and relative gratification explain individual political violence
• Both racial groups responded to real protest activity but with divergent trajectories
• British Communist college students scored lowest of all groups on the F Scale
• British parliamentary ideology was coded on a five-point economic left-right scale
• Bystander responses determine whether perpetrator groups escalate or are checked
• Bystanders’ inaction is read as tacit approval by both perpetrator and victim
• Candidate evaluations only become racially driven when the candidate herself signals race
• Carter framed the 1979 crisis as invisible, a crisis of confidence
• Causal attribution requires perceiving both power and intent in the blamed agent
• Centrality of a belief is measured by its resistance to change.
• Changes in TV power themes track threat levels even when absolute levels do not
• Changing material intergroup relations is the most effective way to change stereotypes
• Changing material reality is the most expedient way to change stereotypes
• Charismatic authority erodes when a leader fails to benefit followers
• Child-rearing practices shape national motivations that drive political and economic rise and fall.
• Childhood experiences with parents can predict later political behavior
• Childhood punishment and parental anger do not predict social dominance orientation.
• Children form group biases only when categories gain salience from adult use.
• Children imitate the powerful because holding power itself is reinforcing.
• Civil-rights success came from appealing to the dominant group’s own stated values
• Civilizational conflict theory’s core corollary about slow mobilization gains no empirical support
• Classical utility theory defines value by final wealth with diminishing marginal returns
• Clear status hierarchies alone produce quiescence absent perceived illegitimacy or instability
• Closed exit pathways sustain terrorist group cohesion.
• Coder contamination undermined the interview evidence for intolerance of ambiguity
• Codeword issues like crime and welfare may proxy for racial attitudes
• Coding categories derived from prior hypotheses risk circular validation
• Coding manuals derived post hoc from data cannot validate differences.
• Cognitive rigidity extends a physical property metaphor to describe thought resistance to change
• Cognitive style and political ideology mutually shape each other
• Cognitive-era political psychology relies chiefly on natural-world data despite added lab experiments
• Cohesive groups can unconsciously suspend critical faculties to preserve harmony
• Cold War-era US ideological identity required an uncomfortable middle position
• Collective action requires a confluence of shared interests among participants.
• Collective identity and shared grievances reinforce each other bidirectionally
• Collective identity can have unintended political repercussions without becoming politicized
• Collective identity politicizes only when a confrontation is widened into a society-wide power struggle
• Collective identity satisfies five basic psychological needs.
• Collective political violence arises from blocked pacific dispositions, not calculated strategy.
• College education does not replace racism with ideology in racial policy preferences.
• Comfortable-feeling candidates are rarely the most effective leaders
• Command control and communications outweigh missile numbers yet go unmeasured
• Committed nonviolent resistance defeated major oppressive regimes in the 20th century
• Committing morally ambiguous acts leads actors to derogate victims
• Comparing rival first-strike damages is logically meaningless since both cannot strike first
• Comparing rival weapons against each other answers questions that make no sense
• Comparing rival weapons head-to-head obscured whether each force could actually do its job
• Competing hypotheses predict different cognitive-complexity patterns across ideological positions
• Competition within groups mirrors cooperation outgroup competition fosters binding.
• Competitive consumption substitutes for class conflict rather than triggering it
• Concave utility curves mathematically imply risk-averse choices.
• Concealing past harm forces organizations into knowingly repeating the same harm
• Concealing past harms converts unknowing negligence into deliberate harm.
• Conflict predictors are consistent but their causal links to violence are not
• Conflict researchers should first reanalyze existing high-quality studies
• Conflicting group interests are neither sufficient nor necessary to produce intergroup discrimination
• Conflicting theories of violence both fit the data because events have multiple causes
• Conscience can be selectively disengaged without psychological instability
• Consciousness-raising theorists held that democratic citizens act irrationally and need awareness to resist exploitation
• Conservatism historically means defending inequality and tradition over science
• Conservatism historically meant attaching to the status quo and resisting science and change
• Conservatism was defined by acceptance of existing inequality as deserved
• Conservative self-identification centers on economics far more than liberal does
• Conservatives are lower in cognitive complexity and higher in need for structure than liberals.
• Conservatives are modestly but significantly less cognitively complex than liberals
• Contemporary racism has gone underground and requires new theories
• Contexts vary in how much they let personality shape behavior.
• Contextual facilitation factors predict civil strife more than deprivation does
• Contingency and inherency always mix but cannot both be equally basic
• Contingency asks why an event occurred, inherency why it did not
• Contingent events are non-random yet depend on aberrant chance conditions
• Contradictory findings signal weak effects rather than mere measurement differences
• Convergent evidence from flawed methods can still outweigh individual failings.
• Copying authorities breeds inconsistent beliefs because convictions go unchecked
• Corporate corruption of employees is often deliberately engineered by management
• Correlation coefficients fluctuate across samples just as means and percentages do
• Coulter’s neutral group was so unusually equalitarian it distorted the comparison
• Counterfactual counterfactuals about leaders shape the most persuasive political judgments
• Counterterrorism deterrence can backfire because governments and terrorists interpret threats oppositely
• Cover stories hide study purposes because informed participants would not act naturally
• Covering up past harms changes accidental harm into knowing intent
• Covert evaluations during message exposure powerfully predict attitude change
• Criminal and law-abiding authoritarianism arise from the same personality dynamics
• Criminal justice discrimination is a special case of cross-cultural dominance hierarchy maintenance.
• Criminal populations scored highest on authoritarianism, not as rebels but as conservatives
• Criminals score highest on authoritarian and prejudice scales, yet are politically conservative
• Cultivation and repression both rest on inherited class violence.
• Culturalist and rational-choice theories of politics align with the contingent-inherent divide.
• Culture resists a single agreed definition despite many competing usages
• Daily news cycles make agenda setting and priming continuous processes
• Decision makers favor readily available information over information relevant to the question
• Decision makers treat self-imposed cost ceilings as absolute prohibitions rather than renegotiable limits
• Decision weights distort even subjectively assessed, vague probabilities
• Decision-makers implicitly assume unseen factors are unimportant
• Deep childhood psychodynamic conflicts drive people toward conservative politics.
• Defenders of unfair systems can be disrupted by explicit attention
• Defining a field’s core problem is a hard-won achievement, not a starting point.
• Deliberate oscillating attitude change is too nonsensical to explain survey data
• Demand characteristics cannot explain minimal group discrimination because observers failed to predict it
• Democrats vary more than Republicans in ideological self-placement due to weaker symbolic anchors
• Demonstrating overall protocol agreement does not establish reliable category-level coding
• Deprived groups often admire the out-group that oppresses them
• Designated enemy groups expand over time beyond their original definition
• Deterrence can backfire because terrorists may read punishment as reward
• Different disadvantaged groups across cultures share the same stereotype content
• Different racism constructs predict political outcomes unequally
• Different types of threat may drive authoritarianism differently
• Dimensional bipolar models misrepresent how people actually evaluate political blocs.
• Disadvantaged groups accept stereotypes that sustain their own oppression.
• Disadvantaged groups adopt negative self-stereotypes that preserve existing social arrangements
• Disadvantaged groups internalize negative stereotypes only when those stereotypes seem legitimate and stable.
• Disadvantaged groups routinely adopt beliefs that perpetuate their own subordination
• Disadvantaged groups stereotype each other to feel superior to comparable groups
• Disadvantaged people rationalize their own state of inequality to cope.
• Discrediting biological racism prepared cultural ground for civil rights
• Discrepant presidents historically outperform congruent ones
• Discriminating against out-groups directly raises self-esteem
• Discrimination has a separate history and cause from prejudiced attitudes.
• Discussion sections reveal limitations and unexpected results worth skeptical scrutiny
• Disease can be modeled as contingent invasion or as intrinsic systemic state
• Distancing evil acts to evildoers preserves belief in a just world.
• Distinct forms of violence need separate explanatory analysis
• Distinct psychological theories make testable rival predictions about ideology and cognitive complexity
• Divergent findings on presidential motives trace to coding and variable differences.
• Doctors reinterpreted their terrible actions as required for generally good ends
• Dominant groups become hegemonic when subordinates accept their vision as legitimate.
• Dominant groups frame subordinate challenges as illegitimate pushiness
• Dominant groups frame subordinate demands as illegitimate through principled defenses
• Dominant-group ideology is never uncontested and always faces internal and external challenges
• Dramatic political events shift racial attitudes positively even among reluctant whites
• Dramatic political events shifted white racial attitudes in a positive direction.
• Durable moral rationalizations persist long after the killings end
• Dynamic authoritarianism correlates with fascist and communist states more than democracies.
• Dynamic, time-series tests confirm that media attention shapes public concern
• Each act of concealment commits organizations to further escalating concealments
• Each military service judged threat by its own single salient dimension
• Each successive youth cohort gets labeled as a distinct political generation
• Early anti-slavery advocates often still believed in white supremacy and racial separation
• Early authoritarianism researchers defined the healthy personality as their own political outlook
• Early physical punishment does not predict later social dominance orientation.
• Early political psychology attributed leader aggression to psychoanalytic, economic, or learning mechanisms
• Early political psychology explained human behavior through deterministic theories like Marxism, psychoanalysis, and behaviorism
• Early scholars linked women’s terrorism to sexual nature rather than social position.
• Early scientific political psychology measured childhood experience against adult political personality
• Easy individual mobility weakens subordinate-group solidarity and collective action
• Economic conservatism among parents predicts prejudice through social dominance orientation
• Economic downturns historically correlated with increases in lynchings of Black Americans
• Economic ideology is measured through paired pro- and anti-business statements
• Economic surplus reliably produces arbitrary-set systems of social hierarchy
• Economics and business education require moral neutrality as a prerequisite.
• Edited anthologies emerged to solve undergraduate access to primary social psychology research
• Education functions as a status marker detached from personal blame
• Education increases ideological consistency without displacing racial attitudes.
• Education rather than raw intelligence lowers authoritarianism scores
• Ego-alien aggression shows up in story villains the subject disowns
• Electing a perceived strong leader itself lowers threat perception among slumping authoritarians
• Elections were once dismissed as lowbrow sport by elite scholars
• Electorally successful presidents fit their era’s motives while historically great presidents contradict them
• Elite adoption of foreign culture can provoke mass violence
• Elite and mass belief systems differ predictably in structure and character
• Elite belief consistency does not extend to their voters
• Elite ideological battles can pass almost unwitnessed by mass publics
• Elite political beliefs are far more temporally stable than mass beliefs
• Elites decline by failing to co-opt dangerous talented outsiders
• Emotional enthusiasm and anxiety toward candidates are independent dimensions, not opposites
• Emotional influence on campaign involvement emerges only late in the cycle
• Emotionality aids rather than disrupts political reasoning and democratic life.
• Emotionality aids rather than undermines democratic deliberation
• Emphasis on equal opportunity increases the pressure to rationalize one’s social rank.
• Empirical evidence on whether violence breeds violence varies by region and type
• Empirical findings rest entirely on the Results sections students tend to skip
• Employers select immigrant workers for assumed docility and vulnerability.
• Ending colonialism did not end liberation struggles; they migrated to Western Europe
• English fascists and communists both took the F Scale in one 1953 study
• Enthusiasm and anxiety are separate systems serving different political functions
• Enthusiasm and anxiety shape voting through different mechanisms, not equally.
• Enthusiasm drives political involvement while anxiety drives attention
• Enthusiasm drives vote choice directly while anxiety only triggers reconsideration
• Entry into evildoing is gradual self-adaptation rather than Milgram’s sudden agentic shift
• Environment acts on the subject only as comprehended and transformed into situation
• Environment dictates whether authoritarian dispositions surface as dominance or deference.
• Environments influence behavior only through individual mediation.
• Equal monetary differences loom larger when the ratio of the amounts is greater
• Equalitarian proposals threaten the meaning of working-class effort and sacrifice.
• Era-level scientific paradigms are shaped by prior ideological revulsions and reactions
• Ethnocentric and anti-democratic attitudes sometimes coexisted with left-leaning political views
• Ethnocentric attitudes do not derive from experience with minority groups.
• Evaluations of ideological labels rest on symbols more than issue positions
• Even angry critics of inequality partly accept meritocratic belief systems
• Even balanced tests show agreement ratios near sixty-forty
• Even disadvantaged group members internalize stereotypes that harm their own interests
• Even experts give lip service to complexity while relying on simple explanations.
• Even explicitly random group assignment produces discrimination stronger than interpersonal similarity
• Even mistaken citizens may confidently hold reversed ideological meanings
• Even religious fundamentalists ground moral judgments in utilitarian harm-based reasoning
• Even working-class men justify income inequality as necessary incentive
• Every person can perform evil under sufficient situational pressure
• Every political violence theory must assume contingency or inherency as basic
• Every working-class man polled believed income equality would destroy work incentive
• Evil actions are societal products that transform ordinary individuals into evildoers
• Evil actions usually stem from ordinary people caught in social forces, not evil individuals
• Evil acts demand retribution while mere wrongdoing does not
• Evil acts mainly arise from organizational pathologies rather than intrinsically evil individuals
• Evil acts uniquely demand retributive punishment beyond deterrence and rehabilitation
• Evil can consist of depraved excess where pleasure gained wildly underweighs pain inflicted
• Evil is a threshold reached through active autonomous harmdoing, not coercion
• Evil is defined by inflicting suffering on any sentient being, not just humans
• Evil is latent in everyone and activated by a moral conversion process.
• Evil requires autonomous, intelligent initiation rather than coerced participation.
• Evil resists formal definition yet is easily recognized in everyday life
• Evildoing is learned through socialization into harmful organizations
• Existing social arrangements are rationalized merely because they exist
• Existing social arrangements get justified simply because they exist
• Experimental design can unobtrusively manipulate news coverage to test agenda setting.
• Experimenter-demand explanations must assume discrimination is induced far more easily than other behaviors
• Explaining election swings assumes elite-level ideology mirrors in the mass public
• Explaining terrorism requires separating initiation from continuation and individual from group
• Explaining why political violence happens is the field’s central theoretical problem.
• Explanation-sketches are provisional scientific accounts awaiting completion through research.
• Explanations that tie many loose ends together feel attractive even to skeptics.
• Exploitive manipulative dishonesty correlates with dominance but not authoritarianism
• External danger and social isolation drive members toward group conformity.
• External political conflict can politicize a broad group identity into predicting collective action.
• Extreme authoritarians among prisoners were labeled overt fascists for openly endorsing force
• Extreme ideology on any side produces simplistic thought, confounding rigidity-of-the-right theory
• Extreme political violence like assassination usually has a pathological psychological basis
• Extremist parties need diverse personality types, not uniform authoritarians.
• Extremists of left and right share tough-minded personality traits
• Eysenck misread comparative F Scale data to claim Communists match Fascists
• F Scale scores strongly tracked anti-Semitism and ethnocentrism but less so political conservatism
• Factored problem-solving fails when threats combine multiplicatively
• Facts become science only when tied together by explanatory theory
• Family status anxiety in parents predicts offspring prejudice
• Farmers in Spain and the Netherlands politicized grievances into confrontational protests
• Fascism and Soviet communism each combined left and right trait clusters
• Fathers’ social dominance predicts their children’s more than mothers’ does.
• Faulty analysis, not missing data, often explains weak historical reconstructions of decisions
• Favorable views of liberals do not imply unfavorable views of conservatives.
• Fear of liability drives corporate concealment of known health harms to workers.
• Fear serves as another recurring justification for discrimination in U.S. history
• Feeling informed about a candidate differs from actually learning facts
• Feminist reframing of rape invalidates earlier authoritarianism measures that used its sentencing.
• Few belief systems are actually held together by strict logic
• Fictional protagonists grow more powerful during threatening eras
• Field realism and participant diversity strengthen an experiment’s external validity
• First-strike capabilities of rivals can never be meaningfully matched against each other
• Five distinct objections question whether personality can explain political outcomes
• Five standard objections challenge personality-based explanations of political behavior
• Five standard objections dismiss personality as a cause of political behavior.
• Fixed-alternative and open-ended methods differ in scoring and judgment
• Focusing on personal responsibility can dilute a group’s adversarial diagnosis and suppress rebellion
• Ford knowingly compared an eleven-dollar fix against human lives in its cost-benefit analysis
• Fragmented roles in killing machines let participants avoid registering the deaths
• Framing a decision shifts the reference point and thereby changes risk preference
• Framing an issue as ending loss gains more support than as gaining benefit.
• Framing crime data as noncrime rates shrinks perceived racial gaps
• Framing crime statistics shifts real resource-allocation decisions
• Framing equivalent policy goals as loss-removal boosts support over gain-framing
• Framing the same policy goal differently shifts public support by nine points
• Franco requested a Nazi bombing that killed one third of Guernica’s population
• Fraternal deprivation measures group-level grievance about power and status relative to out-groups.
• Free-market economic views correlate strongly with social dominance orientation
• French Revolution ideals gained traction only through accidental fit with bourgeois needs
• Freudian political psychology produced many hypotheses but drew reductionism critiques
• Freudian psychoanalytic theory shaped the study of personality in politics
• Fromm explained Nazism as sadistic-masochistic personality sickness.
• Frustrated aggression toward authority gets redirected onto marginalized groups
• Fundamentalist moral objections ultimately rest on utilitarian harm arguments
• Gaining assertive identity can make minority groups disparage other minorities
• Gains-framed arguments persuade less than loss-framed ones.
• Gender expectations spill into work roles and cost women authority
• Gender identity becomes salient mainly in contexts where gender fits the issue
• Gender stereotypes are self-fulfilling, producing the labor divisions they describe
• Gender stereotypes both reflect and reproduce the division of labor
• Genocide emerges through a progressive ladder of escalating acts, not a sudden leap
• Genocide follows a staged progression from derogation through brutality to systematic killing
• Genocide is mostly committed by ordinary people in banal bureaucratic contexts
• Genocide studies yield generalizable lessons for preventing other destructive organizations
• Genocide-enabling cultural conditions must be analyzed at the organizational level.
• Genocides are top-down state projects fusing ideology with obedient compliance.
• German U-boat calculations ignored interactions and misjudged British resolve
• Given the right circumstances, almost anyone can become a terrorist
• Goal-oriented intergroup conflict differs sharply from aimless hostility release
• Good theory is deliberately one-sided and falsifiable, not eclectic
• Government pressure may push terrorist groups toward escalation and counterproductive violence
• Government repression can push fringe individuals into violent opposition by blocking legitimate paths
• Governmental coercion increases rather than suppresses political conflict
• Group cohesiveness shifts terrorist goals from political change toward self-maintenance
• Group conflict attitudes reduce to perceived incompatible interests, relative deprivation, and threat
• Group conflict motives reduce to three measurable attitude types
• Group conflict targets both resource gain and harm to rivals through varied tactics.
• Group conflicts can exist with no material stakes beyond the groups’ invented competition itself.
• Group conflicts cannot be understood without accounting for third parties
• Group grievances take four distinct forms that trigger politicization
• Group identity processes operate autonomously from objective intergroup conflict
• Group identity satisfies basic psychological needs for belonging, distinctiveness, and meaning.
• Group isolation drives violence by filtering outside information and depersonalizing victims
• Group isolation filters perception and enables depersonalizing outsiders.
• Group isolation produces collective misperception and redirected violence against outsiders
• Group membership hinges on self-categorization, not interaction frequency or shared goals
• Group political visibility depends on physical or institutional markers rather than abstract status
• Group visibility depends on physical markers or formal institutions
• Group-based hierarchies divide into age, gender, and arbitrary-set systems
• Group-based inequality attitudes vary across personality, sex, and institutional types.
• Group-difference claims about politics demand controlled comparison of protesters and nonprotesters
• Group-interest incompatibility, not affect, best predicts perceived racial threat
• Group-interest voters lack the contextual grasp to respond ideologically without elite guidance
• Group-level grievance, not individual deprivation, drove 1960s black urban unrest and white voting.
• Group-level grievances about relative disadvantage fueled late-1960s black urban unrest
• Groups act to preserve status differentials even without material gain
• Groups develop negative stereotypes of others to justify their competition for resources
• Groups only compare themselves with relevant out-groups, not all available ones.
• Groups sacrifice larger absolute gains for smaller ones that favor the in-group
• Groups seek relative advantage over absolute material gain, even at self-cost
• Groups sometimes sacrifice absolute gain to achieve relative advantage over rivals
• Harmdoers rationalize by elevating science and derogating victims
• Harold Lasswell imported Freudian drives into political science while suppressing death-drive concepts
• Hegemony succeeds when subordinate groups accept the dominant vision as their own
• Helplessness rage projected outward and guilt turned inward explains terrorist self-sacrifice
• Hiding past harm forces managers to repeat harms knowingly
• Hierarchy persists through individual, institutional, and subordinate-side processes jointly
• Hierarchy-enhancing ideologies span religion, nationalism, racism, and even speciesism.
• High authoritarians readily support persecution of groups including their own.
• High entry costs to political membership push challengers toward violent action.
• High inter-coder reliability can conceal systematically shared bias.
• High scorers on both authoritarianism scales hold anti-Semitic militia beliefs
• High SDOs are more prejudiced than authoritarians but less aggressive.
• High social dominance orientation predicts Machiavellian manipulation beliefs strongly
• High-high authoritarians are mostly anti-Semitic militia-leaning right-wingers
• High-RWA males show elevated rates of sexual assault against women.
• High-RWA people are uniquely susceptible to flattering dishonest persuasion
• Higher-status positions are increasingly monopolized by dominant groups across all stratification systems.
• Hindsight makes genuinely unforeseen organizational harms appear foreseeable and intended, fueling cover-up.
• Historian polls assume greater factual knowledge yields more objective ratings
• Historians’ greatness ratings are uncorrelated with presidents’ vote margins
• Historical anti-Black racism was substantially endorsed by Black Americans themselves.
• Hitler’s Guernica bombing served as target practice for impending war at Franco’s request
• Hobbesian pessimism about human nature anticipated Freud’s later views
• Holding one kind of responsibility can shield actors from attribution of the other
• Homegrown Western recruits join al-Qaeda to resolve internal adolescent tensions
• Hominoid primates show an evolutionary predisposition toward male-enforced ethnocentrism.
• Homogeneous closed communities preceded and intensified political radicalization into terrorism in West Germany.
• Human judgment errors are systematic and shared, not random noise
• Human rationality is bounded by memory and computational limits and often violates rational maxims
• Human societies structure hierarchy by age, gender, and arbitrary-sets
• Humanistic and scientific research pursue opposite goals of case understanding versus theory building
• Humanistic research explains particular cases while scientific research develops general theory.
• Humans can selectively breed for dominance just as animals have been bred for it.
• Hunting through multidimensional data produces spurious significant findings.
• Hypothetical survey questions can validly test political choice theories when respondents answer honestly
• Identical authoritarian dispositions produce opposite behavior across regional environments.
• Identical crime statistics can be framed to seem large or small
• Identical crime statistics produce opposite policy preferences when reframed
• Identifying with a specific movement organization, not just its broad category, predicts participation
• Identity crisis makes adolescents susceptible to totalistic ideological groups
• Identity forms only within collectivities rooted in historical circumstances
• Identity-based actions can reshape political power structures without being intended as political
• Ideological belief constraint depends on stored knowledge, not identity labels alone.
• Ideological categories are not bipolar but require structurally distinct explanatory determinants.
• Ideological consistency declines sharply from elites to mass publics
• Ideological constraint declines sharply and non-elite publics hold disconnected idea clusters.
• Ideological hegemony operates when subordinates internalize the dominant group’s justifications of inequality
• Ideological hegemony substitutes for physical coercion in stable hierarchies
• Ideological labels carry symbolic rather than issue-based meaning for the public.
• Ideological labels derive much of their meaning from society rather than individuals
• Ideological labels derive their power from emotional evaluation when cognitive content is thin
• Ideological labels function as group identities, not coherent philosophies.
• Ideological labels function as identity markers more than coherent belief systems.
• Ideological labels function as social identities that shape group attitudes
• Ideological labels influence political behavior even among people who misunderstand their concepts.
• Ideological labels lack bipolar meaning, so evaluations drive self-identification rather than the reverse
• Ideological labels move people through affect, not cognitive content
• Ideological labels simplify rather than distort the real political world
• Ideological self-identification is driven by symbolic label evaluations, not issue positions.
• Ideological self-identification predicts attitudes toward status quo versus reform groups
• Ideological self-placement is a declaration of group loyalty, not merely a self-categorization act
• Ideological style is measurable via abstraction, deduction, named doctrine, and utopia reference
• Ideologies are defined by how they weight freedom versus equality
• Ideologies that succeed in hard times generate enemies even if they start without them
• Ideology research salvaged its concept by shifting to elites, polarized countries, and analytic thinkers.
• Ideology was not dead in the 1960s but relocated to European theorists.
• Illness can be modeled either as external invasion or as an inherent system state.
• In every measured group, conservatism correlated positively with ethnocentrism and anti-Semitism
• In-group bias arises even without conflict, hostility, or self-interest
• In-group bias intensifies against similar rather than dissimilar out-groups
• Inaugural addresses reflect presidential motives rather than speechwriter voices
• Incumbency-oriented voting results from risk asymmetry, not merely punishment.
• Incumbent advantage reflects voter risk aversion in gains while challengers benefit in losses
• Individual resistance cannot withstand coercive organizational evil, so prevention must be structural.
• Individual resistance is too weak to counter coercive organizational pressure
• Individual-level data supports both J-curve and V-curve theories of conflict
• Inference bias stems from self-centered attention, not self-serving favoritism
• Informal lax rules displace formal rules inside destructive hierarchies
• Information acquisition and covert evaluation are competing mediators of agenda setting.
• Information asymmetry, not self-serving motives, drives egocentric inference in foreign policy
• Inherent phenomena raise the explanatory question why-not-sooner, not why
• Inherited maternal rank shapes offspring social status among several primate species.
• Institutional evil requires a social psychology of how settings override members’ moral scruples
• Institutionalized evil by ordinary citizens exceeds malevolent individuals in destructiveness
• Institutionalized evil by ordinary people outweighs malevolent individuals.
• Integrative complexity correlates with left-of-center, tolerant, nonpartisan thinking
• Integrative complexity measures cognitive structure, not ideological content or correctness
• Integrative complexity of thought depends on which values conflict on a given issue
• Integrative complexity scoring can assess leaders’ cognition at a distance from archival texts
• Intense intergroup conflict makes defection to the outgroup unthinkable and sanctioned
• Intense intergroup conflict makes individual group-switching socially unthinkable and sanctioned
• Intense intergroup conflict overrides interpersonal friendships between opponents
• Interdisciplinary fields’ constant novelty churn causes rapid obsolescence of researchers
• Interdisciplinary research fields thrive on narrow era-specific focus to reach critical mass.
• Interdisciplinary work thrives only through concentrated narrow focus by a young critical mass
• Intergroup comparisons operate within nested levels of more inclusive group identities
• Intergroup competition boosts intragroup cohesion while shared tasks restore cooperation
• Intergroup competition stems from pressures toward positive distinctiveness
• Intergroup conflict and gender psychology are inseparable components of one process
• Intergroup discrimination emerges without any conflict of interests
• Intergroup discrimination targets subordinate males more than subordinate females
• Intergroup power struggles always involve a third-party audience beyond two antagonists
• Intergroup power struggles are tripolar, drawing in a general public as third party
• Intergroup power struggles are tripolar, not bipolar, with each antagonist courting the general public
• Intergroup relations are defined by power asymmetries, not just difference.
• Interviewer prior knowledge of subjects biases questioning and recall.
• Interviewers probed indirectly rather than asking subjects directly about sensitive topics
• Intraceptive psychology divisions grew when threat fell
• Intragroup solidarity and intergroup hostility mutually reinforce each other
• Isolated historical measures lose validity as social contexts shift
• Issue wording without clear winners makes non-ideological citizens answer capriciously
• Issues-based political knowledge is measurable, openly available, and essential to voting.
• Jefferson and Lincoln combined anti-slavery views with firm belief in white supremacy
• Jefferson’s republican ideology framed virtue as a white trait to justify slavery
• Journal articles are the archival backbone of cumulative social-science knowledge
• Journal articles can be read strategically by skipping peripheral detail and unfamiliar statistics
• Judaism socialism and psychoanalysis fused into a shared Frankfurt programme
• Just two personality scales explain most measured prejudice
• Justification dominated 20th-century social psychology yet vanished from stereotyping research
• Killing organizations produce both corpses and fundamentally altered killers
• Killing organizations reproduce themselves by producing socialized killers as output
• Killing organizations run on subsidiary and support roles, not direct killers
• Klan activity surged during economic threat years then dropped sharply
• Klan-related articles surged during high societal threat periods
• Labelling high scorers fascists lacks direct validation against actual fascist party membership
• Large parts of the electorate stayed ignorant of candidates’ policy differences.
• Large shares of the 1980 electorate remained ignorant of candidate policy differences.
• Lasswell held that political leaders project private conflicts onto public symbols
• Lay readers can understand statistical results by reading the plain-English narrative descriptions
• Laypeople hold coherent everyday theories about what makes acts evil
• Leader appeal depends on leader-follower trait matching while performance reflects enduring traits.
• Leader appeal measured in labs diverges from real-world leader effectiveness
• Leader appeal theories fall into traits, situation-matching, and follower-matching accounts
• Leader popularity stems from leader-follower congruence while greatness stems from leader traits
• Leaders politicize groups by embodying the shared identity that makes their frames normative
• Leaders’ psychology affects politics far more directly than mass publics’
• Leading a killing organization does not automatically make one evil
• Left voters’ emotional support for opposition parties is sentimentality, not meaningful politics
• Left-wing authoritarianism is nearly nonexistent in contemporary samples
• Legally sanctioned state violence against subordinate groups is widespread globally
• Liberal and conservative labels function mainly as symbols, not issue positions
• Liberal and conservative perspectives are not mirror images of one another
• Liberal and conservative self-identification is largely symbolic rather than issue-based
• Liberalism and conservatism are distinct attitude systems, not opposite ends of one continuum
• Liberated middle classes found freedom anxiety-producing and sought to escape it
• Library censorship attempts rose and fell with the historical threat level.
• Lincoln’s greatness coincided with a motive profile highly discrepant from his era
• Locke’s blank-slate empiricism directly prefigured Watson’s behaviorism
• Longstanding antiblack socialization persists despite formal legal equality
• Losing a fair competition can produce acquiescence rather than hostility
• Losing groups accept defeat when they deem the competition fair and legitimate
• Loss aversion explains why incumbents win except during bad times.
• Loss aversion makes displeasure from losing exceed pleasure from winning equally
• Loss aversion predicts status quo preference even without risk
• Loss aversion shapes riskless choice, unlike utility theory’s risk dependence
• Low belief stability proves low cognitive centrality, not merely idiosyncratic thinking
• Low integrative-complexity speakers present single-category judgments as self-evident truth
• Low SES can explain each authoritarian trait through situational pressures alone
• Low social status can paradoxically increase out-group admiration
• Low-income workers rationalize their own economic disadvantage to cope with inequality.
• Low-level terrorist groups restrained their methods to fit their self-image as armies
• Low-status groups’ lower social dominance orientation means ideology does not block their politicization
• Low-status people prefer believing their position is just over seeing it as exploitation.
• Lower-status workers maintain self-esteem by claiming superiority in non-material goods.
• Lynching rates in the US historically correlated with economic frustration levels
• Machiavellianism correlates with social dominance but opposes right-wing authoritarianism
• Majority white support for racial job equality emerged only after the 1940s
• Male dominance orientation persists even apart from social role occupancy
• Male-enforced intergroup hostility predates modern humans in the hominoid line.
• Manchester students rated Oxford students higher on stereotypic traits than their own ingroup
• Many voters cannot connect social groups to expected party preferences
• Many voters evaluate parties only on broad national conditions, not group stakes.
• Marginal-status people tend to denigrate those below them when opportunity ideology is strong.
• Marital status derivation makes prejudiced women focus more on mate status
• Marx’s class-in-itself versus class-for-itself maps onto politicized identity
• Marxist theories of false consciousness merged with Freudian psychoanalysis in the Frankfurt School.
• Marxist theory neglected childhood-family effects on political personality
• Marxists assumed working-class pressure drove all egalitarian gains
• Mass belief systems are fragmented and narrow rather than ideologically coherent
• Mass belief-system research assumed ideological meanings are one-dimensional and issue-oriented without evidence.
• Mass political attitudes show virtually no latent structure at all
• Mass publics hold more logical inconsistencies than political elites do.
• Mass voting for abolitionist parties cannot be explained by mass ideological commitment.
• Mass-level partisan swings are not driven by ideological shifts in the public
• Massive news revelations often leave stable foreign policy attitudes unchanged
• Maximum cognitive complexity sits left of center in both elites and the public
• Measuring ideology along one continuum penalizes people who don’t organize attitudes unidimensionally.
• Measuring weapons held substitutes for the unmeasurable outcomes of using them
• Media agenda can determine which problems the public deems important.
• Media agenda setting works through covert evaluation, not information recall
• Media agenda shifts alter the political weight the public assigns to events over time
• Media agenda-setting shapes policy regardless of journalists’ intentions
• Media coverage alters the standards people use to evaluate the president
• Media coverage and elite attention prevented anti-black attitudes from staying abstract and dormant
• Media coverage of one lawsuit produced an effective national educational document
• Media exposure shifts the rank ordering of problem importance
• Media framing determined whether priming moved competence or integrity judgments
• Media framing shifts which issues novices weigh in judging political performance
• Media framing violates the constant-effects assumption of time-series models
• Media priming can alter the foundations of presidential support
• Media priming effects had only experimental support, not real-world confirmation
• Media priming effects on presidential evaluation are uneven across trait dimensions
• Media story selection determines which standards citizens use to judge presidents
• Mediation analysis gives an empirical test for ideology’s legitimizing function
• Memory benefits from narrative, logical structure rather than disjointed facts
• Men of wealth reject equality partly because status competition gives their lives meaning.
• Mere arbitrary group membership, with no interaction, triggers in-group favoritism
• Mere division into groups triggers intergroup discrimination even without conflict or self-interest
• Mere group membership drives discrimination independent of economic self-interest.
• Merely framing participation as correlated with political orientation raises voter turnout
• Methodological critique can disprove a proof but never disprove a theory
• Methodological difficulty justifies rather than excuses studying personality and politics
• Mid-century scholars became fascinated with power after witnessing its world-historical uses
• Midterm seat losses shrink as the initial House majority grows larger
• Milgram argued that evolutionary selection bred an inherited propensity for obedience
• Milgram claimed obedience transitions rest on neural shifts unobservable at the chemical level.
• Milgram held that organizational roles suspend conscience’s check on impulses
• Milgram saw the agentic state as a prewired reversible state, not lasting transformation.
• Milgram subjects obeyed because legitimacy plus incremental momentum locked them into continuing
• Milgram treated mental attitude shifts as real changes comparable to reprogrammed automata.
• Milgram’s agentic state reads as dichotomous yet also holds a social constructionist account.
• Milgram’s obedience paradigm may itself have begun converting subjects into ‘doubled’ evil-doers.
• Milgram’s own experiment may have begun converting subjects to evil
• Milgram’s situational account of construing oneself into obedience remains insightful despite pseudobiological framing.
• Milgram’s subjects likely justified shocking by boosting their valuation of science.
• Military adequacy depends on mission fit, not on comparative force strength
• Military analysts substitute tractable balance-of-numbers questions for harder sufficiency questions
• Military planners habitually assess new weapons by own use, not adversary use
• Military sufficiency depends on task and context, not raw comparison with adversaries
• Militia beliefs correlate most strongly with left-wing authoritarianism
• Mill founded contingency theory; Durkheim and Weber grounded inherency theory.
• Minimal group discrimination is not merely an experimenter-expectancy artifact
• Minimal intergroup discrimination requires none of the assumed preconditions
• Minorities show inconsistent prejudice patterns toward other minorities across studies
• Models can disarm invalidation by restating what everyone already knows
• Moderate left thinkers show more flexible reasoning than either conservatives or radicals.
• Modern destructive capacity makes understanding intergroup aggression a survival imperative
• Modern dictionaries reduce evil to mere moral wrongness, stripping its distinct meaning
• Modern secular culture lost its authoritative list of moral wrongs
• Modernization outpacing political institutions triggers revolutionary violence
• Mood is two-dimensional, driven by distinct enthusiasm and anxiety systems in the brain.
• Moods function as strategic information rather than mere cognition coloring
• Moral doubts can be converted into private discomfort within organizations
• Moral restraints weaken when no specific victim is salient
• Moral self-regulation is not a fixed conscience but can be selectively disengaged
• Moral-critique interventions have little purchase on social dominators
• Most citizens form opinions on isolated issues without linking them ideologically
• Most contingency theories reduce to relative-deprivation theory as Gurr advanced it.
• Most genocide is committed by ordinary people in banal bureaucratic roles, not psychopaths.
• Most Northerners in 1855 were barely aware slavery was controversial.
• Most observed attitude instability is random noise, not real opinion change
• Most of the electorate does not conceptualize politics as elites do.
• Most people become temporarily more authoritarian when threat rises, then revert as threat fades
• Most people lack coherent ideological belief systems.
• Most people violate expected utility theory’s substitution axiom in identical choice frames
• Most prejudice reduces to two personality types
• Most voters evaluate politics through group-interest loyalties rather than ideology
• Most voters lack meaningful beliefs even on issues elites heatedly contest
• Multiple consistent evil acts anchor attribution of evil to a person
• Narrative descriptions of results can exaggerate what the data shows
• Narrowing equality to within-class comparisons makes self-placement tolerable
• National character research declined partly because of its political danger
• National character research descended from ancient ethnographic stereotypes
• National identity is not naturally experienced but requires social transmission to ordinary people
• National identity penetrates populations only through a concept transmitted by institutions, not direct experience
• National-character research declined because ascribing traits to groups proved politically dangerous
• Natural experimental conditions allow rigorous causal tests of media effects
• Natural quasi-experiments can separate media event effects from preexisting differences
• Nazi and American researchers described nearly the same personality types with opposite valuations.
• Nazi ideology reframed genocide as a public health decision continuous with euthanasia
• Nazi personality theory mapped ideological enemy categories onto alleged perceptual traits
• Nazi personality typing defined perceiving clearly and persisting firmly as hereditary Germanic virtues
• Negative attention from authorities can reinforce a negative identity.
• Negative campaigns spur voter deliberation while positive ones merely mobilize
• Negative government attention beats being ignored for identity-confused people.
• Negative sanctions and repression typically precede and provoke collective political violence
• Negative sanctions by authorities escalate protest into collective political violence
• New racisms combine formal equality, negative affect, and nonracial values
• News coverage devoted to a problem increases public belief in its importance
• News coverage priming affects performance judgments more than character judgments
• News coverage prominence shapes issue weighting independent of persuasion
• News coverage prominence shifts how heavily people weigh issues in political judgments
• News media bias in agenda-setting overrides assumptions of constant effects
• News revelations can shift how opinions weight judgments without shifting the opinions themselves
• News revelations shift political support by spotlighting some issues while suppressing others
• Nineteenth-century whites viewed blacks as children needing protection and savages needing monitoring
• No attempt to abolish group hierarchy in surplus societies has succeeded
• No common terrorist personality exists; terrorism is instrumental
• No empirical link exists between thought complexity and policy soundness
• No known society has ever had women controlling military and political power
• No measured individual has endorsed even mildly authoritarian left-wing views
• No political movement of uniform personality types could function
• No research definitively settles an issue; it only shifts probabilities
• No simple direct relationship links socioeconomic change to political violence
• No single terrorist personality exists; violence is instrumentally goal-oriented
• No society with economic surplus has ever abolished arbitrary-set hierarchy
• No study has ever found a negative relation among prejudice attitudes
• Nonviolent civil disobedience has repeatedly defeated major oppressive regimes.
• Norms stabilizing into a combination do so because it works.
• Occupational roles rather than sex drive gender stereotypes
• Officers bear command responsibility for subordinates’ actions whether or not they ordered them
• Old-fashioned racism and symbolic racism are theoretically and empirically distinct constructs
• Old-fashioned racism declined but prejudice mutated into subtler forms
• Old-fashioned racism is no longer an effective political force in America
• Old-fashioned racism weakly predicts politics; symbolic racism strongly does
• Only 67 percent of Whites support individual equality principles.
• Only a small educated minority holds ideologically coherent political beliefs
• Only a small fraction of voters hold coherent ideological belief systems
• Only a tiny elite stratum of voters qualifies as true ideologues
• Only half of voters can map issues onto liberal and conservative poles
• Open conflict and dispute fostered more positive racial attitudes.
• Open-ended political questions disadvantage low-education respondents by taxing verbal ability
• Open-ended survey questions distort ideological meaning among less educated respondents.
• Ordinary citizens genuinely lack organized belief systems, not just the words to describe them
• Ordinary citizens lack the organized belief systems scholars once assumed they possess
• Ordinary organizations can also socialize members into harming others, not just coercive ones
• Ordinary people distinguish evil from bad reliably without being able to define it
• Ordinary people transform into autonomous, knowing evildoers through a conversion process
• Ordinary workers rationalize elite rule as superior education and wider vision
• Organizational honor can outweigh factual innocence in institutional decision-making
• Organizational screening, not just disposition, filters out mentally ill recruits
• Organizational settings enable humans to adapt to moral wrongdoing at psychic cost
• Organizations can drift into evil without any member intending it
• Organizations deliberately harm others when corporate ideology and fear of job loss align.
• Organizations hide harm by denying consequences, then by denying responsibility for them.
• Organizations that cover up past harms commit themselves to future wrongdoing
• Overtly punitive family socialization was theorized to produce authoritarian personality
• Parental attitudes poorly predict children’s prejudice levels
• Parental status anxiety drives children’s prejudice through class-distinction grooming
• Participant observation yields deeper portraits of mentality than verbal survey data do
• Participants told a study’s true purpose would not behave naturally
• Party-line shifts cannot be read as ideological shifts in the mass public
• Past outcomes anchor expectations so we focus on deviations from them.
• Paternalistic stereotypes can be internalized by the oppressed group itself.
• Patriarchy was geographically universal in the ancient world
• People accept responsibility for their status only when they believe effort shapes outcomes
• People are risk-averse in gains but risk-seeking in losses
• People assign evil where rational preparation precedes a horribly irrational act
• People choose non-round numbers to signal that figures resulted from detailed calculation.
• People classify evil acts with certainty, consensus, and articulated principles
• People derogate their victims to justify having harmed them.
• People differ in awareness of flaws more than in the flaws themselves
• People distinguish moral badness from evil by something beyond harmfulness
• People find conjunctive and disjunctive rules far harder than single-element rules.
• People high in both social dominance and authoritarianism show the highest prejudice of all
• People hold stereotypes of groups they have never encountered
• People justify income inequality through education’s effort, time, and responsibility
• People label themselves ideologically via differing symbolic attachments, not a shared spectrum
• People learn about politics only when negative events disrupt complacency and trigger attention.
• People learn about politics only when something signals that things are wrong
• People legitimize existing social arrangements even against their own interests
• People make untroubled, consensual judgments of evil in daily life
• People overclaim credit for joint work because their own actions are most salient
• People overweight shared comparison dimensions even when unique dimensions matter more
• People overweight small probabilities and underweight moderate and high ones
• People prefer to see all evils as clustered against all goods
• People preserve the quantum-of-evil view by licensed exceptions
• People prioritize beating an out-group over maximizing their own group’s profit
• People rationalize oppressive arrangements that harm them rather than protect their own interests
• People rationalize outcomes even when they know the outcomes were arbitrary
• People read coordinated intent into states that are actually blundering
• People sacrifice personal material gain to favor even minimal in-groups
• People sacrifice real profit just to outrank a comparable out-group.
• People see coherent Machiavellian planning where states are actually blundering.
• People settle for easy, available information even when better decisions are attainable.
• People spontaneously stereotype groups to rationalize their existing social roles
• People stereotype groups to justify an existing division of labor
• People stereotype themselves and their own groups to justify existing social arrangements
• People who do evil use shifting justifications rather than entering a fixed altered state
• People widely absorb that ideas co-occur without knowing why they do
• People with genuine interest show stable attitudes; instability marks disinterest
• People with intense personal convictions are more likely to oppose authoritarian regimes.
• People’s abstract political principles often fail to match their concrete policy preferences
• People’s prior attitudes shape which label they prefer for the same issue
• Perceived changeability, not status difference itself, determines intergroup comparison meaningfulness
• Perceived competition and competence together trigger envy or contempt
• Perceived group threat tracks real-world politics more than psychological insecurity
• Perceived impermeability and illegitimacy of status differences deepen low-status group identification.
• Perceived instability plus illegitimacy spurs subordinate groups to reject inferiority
• Perceived rather than actual conflict drives intergroup prejudice
• Perceived stratification pushes social behavior from interpersonal toward intergroup patterns
• Perceived threat alone, not deprivation or group-interest beliefs, directly drives racial policy attitudes
• Perceived threat differs from group grievance by targeting change agents rather than group structure.
• Perceived threat produces bounded racial change, support for principle but not cost
• Perceived trait differences rationalize group advantage
• Perfect neutrality in politically charged science is elusive and possibly undesirable
• Perfect scientific neutrality is elusive and possibly undesirable when moral values are at stake
• Persistent inequality breeds new ideologies defending privileged positions across eras
• Personal appeal is treated as central by campaigns but as noise by voting scholars
• Personality theory rests on three shared assumptions about dispositions, stability, and situational expression
• Personality-and-politics research divides into psychobiography, typologies, and aggregative analyses
• Physical explanations like brain tumors serve as licensed exceptions shielding the evil-core view
• Pluralism should shift to a state of multiple contending minorities
• Policies persist even when their original justifications change
• Political actors balance what is right against what is politically feasible
• Political arrangements can reshape individual minds to preserve them.
• Political elites hold far more stable policy beliefs than ordinary citizens
• Political elites hold ideologically organized beliefs while the mass public shows little constraint
• Political emotion splits into anxiety and enthusiasm systems that adapt to campaign pressure
• Political entry fees determine whether challengers resort to violent action
• Political experts resist media priming because dense prior knowledge absorbs new information
• Political factors like pain tolerance decide wars but get excluded from strategic analysis
• Political ideology and prejudice are correlated but far from perfectly aligned
• Political knowledge enables resistance to media agenda setting via counterarguing
• Political leaders project private conflicts onto public symbols and rationalize them as public interests.
• Political learning depends on education and interest, not information scarcity.
• Political mobilization requires transforming a confrontation into a broader societal power struggle
• Political moderates think in more complex terms than extremists
• Political personality typologies trace to Plato’s intergenerational rebellion account
• Political propaganda mostly reinforces existing preferences rather than altering them.
• Political psychologists favor descriptive over normative models of decision-making
• Political psychology can improve decision-making by analyzing past policy failures
• Political psychology consolidated as a discipline only in the late 1970s.
• Political psychology has cycled through internally-focused themes that are now shifting toward intergroup processes.
• Political psychology in the 1980s-90s centered on individual information-processing mechanisms
• Political psychology matured through consolidated assumptions and methodological consensus
• Political psychology studies the reciprocal influence of political institutions and human behavior
• Political psychology studies the timeless human struggles depicted in Guernica
• Political psychology’s interdisciplinarity persisted across three distinct research eras
• Political psychology’s typological tradition produced scales for authoritarian, dogmatic, and Machiavellian personalities
• Political science and psychology have sustained deeper cross-fertilization than either has with closer fields.
• Political science and psychology share unusually sustained interdisciplinary exchange despite closer neighbors
• Political symbols either unify or divide depending on their object
• Political symbols split into consensus-building versus conflict-marking functions
• Political threat from subordinate groups gets mislabeled as individual prejudice
• Political threat motivates citizens to learn about politics while enthusiasm drives involvement.
• Political violence arises from frustration over unmet value expectations
• Political violence divides into competitive, reactive, and proactive forms.
• Political violence stems from frustration at a gap between expectations and capabilities
• Politically anxious voters gather new information and may abandon old habits.
• Politicization costs group members in opportunity and personal safety
• Politicization requires blaming an external opponent for one’s grievances.
• Politicization requires forcing wider society to take sides, not mere group confrontation.
• Politicized collective identity requires power struggles reaching beyond immediate antagonists
• Politicized collective identity requires shared grievances, adversarial attributions, and societal involvement
• Politicized identity chiefly serves understanding and agency functions over other psychological needs.
• Politicized identity converts a group from thing-in-itself to actor-for-itself
• Politicized identity develops through a sequence of gradual steps
• Popular psychology functions as licensed exceptions that remove the onus of evil
• Popular psychology functions mainly to displace blame from evil actors onto prior causes
• Popular social desirability scales show weak internal consistency in student samples
• Positive campaign ads suppress deliberation while negative ads spur rational attention
• Positive campaigns suppress deliberation while anxiety-inducing ones promote it.
• Positive evaluation of one ideological label does not imply negative evaluation of the other.
• Positive stereotypes can justify a disadvantaged group’s low status
• Positive stereotypes can justify subordination more effectively than negative ones
• Positivist psychology traditions block the study of evil
• Positivist research traditions made the study of evil academically difficult.
• Post-Civil War laissez-faire ideology justified black subordination without slavery
• Post-civil-rights African American mobilization declined as shared enemy attribution diluted to self-blame.
• Post-hoc category derivation need not invalidate converging findings.
• Post-war environmentalism was an antigenetic reaction to social Darwinism
• Postbellum individualism ideology justified black subordination without slavery
• Postwar authoritarianism research studied followers rather than would-be tyrants
• Postwar political psychology’s environmentalism was a reaction against social Darwinism and fascism
• Power and affiliation are the two fundamental dimensions structuring all social behavior.
• Power sharing requires each side to become strong enough to force it.
• Power-sharing cooperation emerges only after the weaker party has gained real strength.
• Pragmatic implicature explains obedience in Milgram’s experiments
• Pre-existing devaluation and authority-worship predict a society’s turn to scapegoating
• Predicting later opinions requires no more recent data than earlier ones
• Prejudice against one group predicts prejudice against all groups
• Prejudice and slavery reinforced each other in a feedback loop.
• Prejudice stems from identity needs, not personality or resource competition
• Prejudice-based accounts cannot explain why racial attitudes changed form
• Prejudice-trait correlations could be artifacts of response style rather than real traits.
• Prejudiced interviewees exaggerated sexual prowess while unprejudiced ones admitted insecurity
• Prejudiced patients somatize distress and blame external events unlike unprejudiced ones
• Prejudiced people avoid introspection and blame external forces
• Prejudiced people disown their own negative traits and project them outward
• Prejudiced people evaluate relationships by status potential rather than intimacy
• Prejudiced people frame psychological distress as somatic, mechanical breakdown.
• Prejudiced people report more consistently favorable self-images than unprejudiced people
• Prejudiced people show self-glorification while unprejudiced people show objective self-appraisal
• Prejudiced people’s disowned traits get relocated onto outgroups
• Prejudiced personalities somatize distress while tolerant ones psychologize it
• President-society motive congruence is measured as reversed summed discrepancy scores.
• Presidential campaigns measurably increase public accuracy about candidate positions.
• Presidential electoral success depends on motive congruence with society, not on motive direction
• Presidential evaluations hinge on whatever considerations are most readily accessible in memory
• Presidential greatness ratings chiefly reflect the rater’s values
• Presidential popularity depends on personality fit with the era, but greatness does not
• Presidential popularity is the chief basis of power and is driven by national conditions
• Presidential popularity stems from matching voters’ motives while historical success reflects leader personality.
• Presidential power depends on popularity, which is shaped by large national and international events
• Press coverage can create perceived Web popularity after the fact
• Preventing atrocities requires institutional change, not just producing more heroes
• Preventing evil requires intervening at the organizational, not individual, level
• Preventing mass atrocities depends on societal institutions, not on producing heroic resisters
• Priming can explain most of an observed approval drop
• Priming theory predicts a scandal makes relevant opinions weigh more heavily in leader evaluations
• Prisoners scored highest on authoritarian scales while holding conservative patriotic views
• Privatized personal depression is being displaced by public political anger.
• Pro-system psychological propositions hold for most societies most of the time
• Problem framing around base crime rates shifts how subjects allocate program funds
• Production capacity can outweigh standing force size in wartime strength
• Projected outgroup traits mirror the very weaknesses subjects deny in themselves
• Projection both enables and rationalizes the direct expression of repressed impulses
• Projection functions to justify aggression against minorities who are believed equally aggressive
• Protesters strategically provoke opponents to force third-party intervention and support.
• Protracted conflicts resist intergroup attitude interventions
• Provoked overreaction from antagonists is a deliberate tactic to enlist third-party allies.
• Psychiatric diagnoses gain legal power when jurors accept their underlying medical metatheory
• Psychiatric labels were wrongly applied where situational responses explained the scores
• Psychoanalytic ego-defense accounts of stereotyping failed empirically
• Psychoanalytic theorists explained fascism’s appeal via unconscious personality needs.
• Psychoanalytic theorists variously classified Japanese national character as oral, anal, and phallic
• Psychoanalytic theory can justify contradictory characterizations of the same nation
• Psychoanalytic theory converts correlated interview data into a personality structure
• Psychological perceptions of decline can count as difficult life conditions, not only material hardships.
• Public familiarity with a challenger candidate grows steadily across a campaign.
• Published research survives rejection by several gatekeepers who vouch for it
• Punitive government responses can reward terrorists by confirming their worldview.
• Punitiveness tracked secular trends, not threat levels
• Quiescent subordinate groups show less ethnocentrism until questioning their low-status identity reignites resource conflict.
• Race serves as the dominant decision cue for whites on race-targeted policies
• Racial attitudes comprise a felt group position of superiority, proprietary claim, and perceived threat
• Racial attitudes dominate nonracial factors across all racial policy areas
• Racial attitudes explain more unique variance than nonracial values do
• Racial attitudes form several distinct dimensions rather than one unitary prejudice
• Racial attitudes influence white Americans’ policy and candidate preferences beyond ideology
• Racial attitudes reduce to a felt sense of group position
• Racial attitudes, not ideology or values, drive whites’ opposition to race-targeted policies
• Racial conflict shifted from formal exclusion to resource redistribution
• Racial content, not policy-specific reasoning, drives most white opposition to race-related policies
• Racial ideology arises from inequality interacting with positive ingroup identity, not outgroup hostility.
• Racial inequality persists in new symbolic forms that defend privileged group positions
• Racial residential segregation exceeds class segregation and persists across all social classes.
• Racism drives whites’ policy views regardless of policy content or education
• Racism persists but has shifted from blatant to unconscious subtle forms
• Railroad-track-style numeric comparisons persisted against quality in Britain’s pre-war assessments
• Random actor placement makes personality study more rather than less necessary
• Random personality placement in roles makes personality study more urgent, not less.
• Random role assignment alone leads people to infer ability differences that justify those roles.
• Random role assignment still produces self-stereotyping that fits the role
• Randomly distributed actor traits make studying them more, not less, urgent
• Rape sentence length was once used as a proxy for authoritarian punitiveness.
• Rapid modernization triggers revolution when political institutions cannot process new demands
• Rapid socioeconomic change breeds frustration through anomie and rising expectations.
• Rapid-growth and mobilization theories rest on selective illustrations, not robust evidence.
• Rational choice assumes preferences stay stable across equivalent framings
• Rational choice theory rests on coherence and invariance assumptions
• Rational states weigh expected gains versus not attacking, not damage ratios
• Rationalizing one’s status provides moral reassurance resembling belief in a Just God
• Reading a discussion section’s opening first improves comprehension of a research report
• Reagan’s rhetoric shifted from authoritarian to reassuring as perceived threat declined
• Real group differences mean affective hostility alone need not be prejudice.
• Real-world dramatic events outside the lab trigger media priming effects on presidential evaluation
• Realistic conflict theory treats group identity as an epiphenomenon, not an autonomous cause
• Redefining success as occupational merit denies class status’s self-esteem threat
• Reducing a certain outcome’s probability has greater psychological impact than reducing an already-uncertain one
• Regime repression capacity is the most obvious facility enabling political violence
• Rejected socially desirable roles can become the basis of an identity.
• Religious fundamentalism correlates strongly with right-wing authoritarianism but barely with social dominance.
• Repeated violence gradually erases moral discomfort, escalating terrorist aggression.
• Repeated violent acts progressively extinguish moral discomfort within a supportive group.
• Replacing words from another trial created deviant stimuli the prime could not clarify
• Replicated findings across parent and student populations confirm scale validity
• Rereading the discussion opening and abstract consolidates understanding of a research report
• Research findings only make propositions more likely, never conclusive.
• Research introductions establish rationale, context, and strategy in sequence
• Research methods differ in which party bears the burden of decoding meaning
• Research on genocide contradicts ordinary beliefs about evil’s origins.
• Research reports must remain comprehensible to statistically untrained readers
• Research scales can be framed to test hypotheses about ideology
• Researchers competitively tested 22 personality measures against each other
• Researchers define racism behaviorally as consistently more negative responses to black-associated objects
• Researchers expected anti-Semitic subjects to hold conservative economic individualism
• Researchers measured conventionalism via matched incumbent House election margins across threat levels
• Researchers must commit to one primary model of human motivation to theorize well
• Researchers overcomplicate models out of fear of disconfirmation rather than insight
• Researchers study observable national behaviors because attitude data on nations are scarce
• Researchers test ideology scales alongside conspiracy-belief measures in family studies
• Researchers wrongly assume ideology is bipolar and issue-based
• Resentment of the lower classes stems from the perceived devaluation of one’s own efforts
• Residential segregation by race persisted independent of class and education through 1970
• Resignation to one’s class position is often a defensive pose masking ambition
• Resignation to one’s fate softens the sting of unfulfilled ambition.
• Resisting organizational evil individually is too rare to be the main preventive lever
• Resource inequality creates intergroup conflict only when subordinates reject their negative self-image
• Respondents avoided exactly the choice pattern prospect theory predicts they should
• Retrospective legitimacy of revolutions depends heavily on their success.
• Review and theoretical articles rest entirely on evidence from original research reports
• Revolution becomes likely when prolonged improvement is abruptly reversed
• Revolution happens when state barriers to pressure are removed, not blocked.
• Revolution’s distinctive condition is parallel mutually exclusive claims to sovereignty.
• Revolutionary leaders need both fanaticism to win and flexibility to survive governing
• Revolutions erupt when conditions improve, not when they worsen
• Revolutions happen when governmental weakness unblocks pressures, not when they are blocked
• Revolutions happen when obstacles to pressure are removed, not when they are created.
• Right-wing authoritarianism predicts persecution and harsh sentencing more strongly than social dominance does.
• Right-wing authoritarians are defensively self-deceiving yet score low on social desirability scales
• Right-wing authoritarians fail to recognize their own prejudice while social dominators partly do.
• Right-wing authoritarians resist learning they are prejudiced.
• Right-wing party supporters show higher authoritarianism and social dominance than left-wing supporters.
• Rigidity of thought is not exclusive to the political right
• Rising classes fear social judgment for lacking upper-class know-how
• Rising social threat shifts whole populations toward authoritarian attitudes.
• Risky challengers win bad-time votes despite equal expected value.
• Role specialization in coercion enables elites to enforce expropriation
• Rousseau held that society corrupts inherently good human nature
• Sales’s threat-authoritarianism finding may be an artifact of ordering and record keeping
• Salience heuristics, not logical weight, routinely drive human judgment.
• Scholars dispute whether new racism is genuinely distinct from old racial prejudice
• School segregation increased between 1976 and 1980 after early progress
• Schools, firms, and research labs have actualized high potential for incubating harm
• Science advances more by recruiting new researchers than by retooling existing ones
• Science explains facts rather than merely cataloguing them; isolated facts are trivia
• Scientific research on contemporary issues is itself shaped by its own climate.
• SDO and RWA dominance over prejudice holds across a broader range of targets
• SDO and RWA jointly explain half of overall prejudice variance
• SDO predicts generalized prejudice while RWA predicts religion-based prejudice
• SDT converts vague ideology claims into empirically testable mediational hypotheses
• Secular western culture lost its authoritative list of sins
• Secure superiority breeds more discrimination against cooperative subordinates than against competitive ones
• Seeking positive distinctiveness through competition generates conflict over scarce resources
• Self-declared capitalists score highest on multiple prejudice measures
• Self-imposed spending limits function as commitment devices against temptation
• Self-placement alone cannot explain conservative or liberal label evaluations
• Sensitivity correlations detect accuracy but cannot reveal direction of bias
• Separatist terrorism offers positive identity within a minority community, not just negative rejection
• Sex-crime sentences lengthened during low-threat years, contrary to threat theory.
• Simple black-and-white framing exemplifies the lowest cognitive complexity scores
• Simple valence models of political emotion are inadequate
• Simplifying a theory to its essentials makes its core mechanisms clearer
• Single-variable blind raters guarded coding against hypothesis contamination
• Situation explains much behavior, but residual variance need not be trait-based
• Situational fit and personal readiness jointly determine which identity becomes salient.
• Slavery and prejudice were mutually reinforcing causes, each feeding the other
• Small derogatory perceived differences suffice to justify group advantage
• Small everyday discrimination acts accumulate into large power gaps between groups
• Small qualified trait differences carry strong evaluative weight
• Small qualified trait differences with strong negative evaluation justify dominance
• Social background shapes politics only through its influence on psychological predispositions
• Social behavior ranges along a continuum from purely interpersonal to purely intergroup
• Social categories both order the world and define the self’s place in it
• Social categories function as cognitive tools that position the self comparatively
• Social dominance and authoritarianism jointly predict a large share of prejudice variance.
• Social dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism are distinct personality syndromes despite shared prejudice.
• Social dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism are distinct psychological dispositions rather than one trait.
• Social dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism together explain half of all prejudice
• Social dominance orientation explains most prejudice and resolves prior RWA findings
• Social dominance orientation is shaped by group status, socialization, and temperament alike
• Social dominance orientation strongly predicts nationalism, racism, and conservatism
• Social dominance prejudice correlations survive controls for social desirability bias
• Social dominators acknowledge their own prejudice while authoritarians do not.
• Social dominators acknowledge their prejudice but do not care
• Social dominators apply double standards knowingly when it serves their own ends
• Social dominators apply moral double standards only when self-interest is at stake.
• Social dominators are more prejudiced but less behaviorally aggressive than authoritarians
• Social dominators internalize competitive cultural messages and sports training from pushy fathers
• Social dominators target weak minorities because domination itself motivates them
• Social dominators who attend church tend to be extrinsically rather than intrinsically religious
• Social hierarchy is maintained by dominants and subordinates cooperatively
• Social identity derives its value from comparisons against out-groups
• Social identity theory cannot explain negative in-group stereotypes among the disadvantaged
• Social identity theory reframed intergroup conflict as arising from categorization and comparison
• Social identity theory underestimates how readily disadvantaged groups justify their own oppression
• Social identity theory underestimates ideological domination’s grip on the oppressed.
• Social identity theory’s contribution is integrative rather than wholly original
• Social legitimacy of violence explains IRA versus RAF organizational and class differences
• Social psychology already knows how to produce torturers through small-step induction
• Social role arrangement alone produces justifying stereotypes in both parties.
• Social scientists have proliferated competing ‘new racism’ concepts since biological racism lost legitimacy
• Societal threat causally drives authoritarianism rather than merely co-occurring with it.
• Societal threat levels correlate with violent themes in pornography
• Societal threats produce increases in power-themed popular television; declines follow reduced threat
• Societal-level authoritarianism rises and falls with social threat levels
• Some apparent irrationality is rational once decision costs are counted.
• Some legitimizing myths (socialism, feminism, the Declaration) actively reduce group-based inequality.
• Some workers believe upward mobility depends on personal internal conviction.
• Someone can hold a strong ideological identity while lacking its policy contents.
• Standardized report formats let readers locate any finding quickly across all journals
• State terrorism differs so fundamentally from insurgent terrorism that analysis must be separate
• States decide war by expected gains versus the no-war baseline, not damage comparison
• States pursue conflicting policies by ignoring cross-policy implications
• Static indicators persist because they are cheap despite being inadequate
• Status anxiety drives prejudice through projection and displaced aggression chains
• Status anxiety extends to being surpassed by one’s own peers and neighbors
• Status hierarchies dampen conflict by limiting cross-group comparisons, yet cannot explain rapid social change.
• Status hierarchies reduce conflict by limiting meaningful comparisons between groups
• Status is a comparison outcome, not a scarce commodity
• Status is relational comparison, not a fixed resource, and affects behavior through identity
• Status rise brings both fear of adjustment and pleasure at settling scores
• Stereotype content is predictable from material and social structural position
• Stereotyped groups unknowingly fulfill others’ negative expectations, locking in their subordination
• Stereotypes become accurate only because targets conform to expectations
• Stereotypes can arise from role rationalization, not observed group differences
• Stereotypes function to make existing social inequalities seem legitimate and natural
• Stereotypes influence judgments even when perceivers are unaware
• Stereotypes need not originate from kernels of truth
• Stereotypes protect personal status and social position, not just simplify thought.
• Stereotypes serve an ideological function of justifying the status quo.
• Stereotypes serve as cognitive shortcuts that sustain us-versus-them attribution patterns
• Stereotyping occurs even without personal stake in the groups judged
• Stereotyping stems from ideological environments, not just individual self-interest
• Stories exposing systemic corruption can inadvertently reinforce resignation to it
• Strategic assessments feign certainty about untested nuclear weapons systems
• Stress seekers divide into individualistic and group-merging psychological types
• Strong character-based needs drive opposition to authoritarian regimes
• Strong exit barriers channel subordinate discontent into satisficing social-creativity strategies.
• Structural complexity of thought is independent of ideological correctness
• Structural factors alone can produce violence without prior animosity
• Structural inequality does not inevitably produce group conflict
• Students role-playing Hitler rated him maximally on every authoritarianism scale
• Subcultural norm explanations must still explain why authoritarian traits cohere
• Subjective status marginality, not objective SES, drives ethnocentrism
• Subordinate competitiveness requires both group identification and dominant comparison
• Subordinate groups adopt vague spiritual equality as psychological compensation for status loss
• Subordinate groups historically reversed self-derogation into positive in-group identity and militancy
• Subordinate groups often favor their oppressors rather than showing ethnocentrism
• Subordinate groups often internalize dominant-group evaluations and derogate their own group
• Subordinate groups share the dominant status ranking of their own subordination
• Subordinates endorsing self-demeaning ideologies reduces the coercive force elites need.
• Subordinates internalize negative stereotypes that make them self-fulfill those stereotypes
• Subordinates sometimes favor dominant groups over their own ingroups
• Subordinates widely share belief in the legitimacy of their own subordinate status.
• Subordinates’ positive self-stereotypes can reinforce the status quo.
• Subtle racial attitudes stem from structural inequality plus perceived group threat
• Subtle survey wording can capture emotional intensity separate from valence
• Successful leaders rise when their own conflicts match their followers’ needs
• Sumner coined ethnocentrism to explain rigid in-group preference
• Superior weaponry does not guarantee success in a counterforce war
• Surplus-producing societies organize into age, gender, and arbitrary-set hierarchies.
• Survey correlations between prejudice scales may be inflated by response style, not real relationships
• Survey data can validate neurophysiological theory despite weak causal control
• Survey items can separately measure enthusiasm and anxiety toward candidates
• Survey shifts in ideological self-identification measure symbolic meaning, not issue movement.
• Survey variables can be normalized to a common metric for comparable regression coefficients
• Surveys can name a candidate and ask which emotions that person evoked in respondents.
• Sustained evil actions require organizations to train and reinforce killing
• Sustained media and political emphasis on crime keeps anticriminal punitiveness persistently high
• Sustained terror threats corrode public openness and trust across a society
• Symbolic racism combines antiblack affect with conservative nonracial values
• Symbolic racism differs from traditional prejudice only in measurement, not theory
• Symbolic racism loads on a statistically distinct factor from older racism forms
• Symbolic racism measures include the belief that blacks demand too much, too fast.
• Symbolic racism measures may overlap conceptually with their outcome variables
• Symbolic racism now dominates older forms of racial prejudice in American politics
• Symbolic racism outweighs egalitarian beliefs in shaping White racial policy views
• Symbolic racism research standardizes measures around four or five recurring themes.
• Symbolic racism scales frame perceived government attention to blacks as undeserved advantage.
• Symbolic racism scales measure denial of ongoing discrimination as one core theme.
• Symbolic racism should outweigh both older racism and race-neutral values in shaping policy views
• Symbolic racism theory explains policy attitudes via moral values plus outgroup dislike
• Symbolic racism theory is accused of merely relabeling conservatism
• Symbolic racism theory reinterprets the principles-implementation gap as a new prejudice form
• Symbolic racism’s policy effects cannot be explained by mere question-content overlap
• System justification can outweigh both ego- and group-interest defense.
• System justification theory attributes stereotype endorsement to status-quo legitimization
• System-justification is underemphasized, not inevitable, in stereotyping research
• System-justification motives can override even the defense of one’s own group interests.
• Systematic disadvantage drives minorities to form separate organizations and class identity
• Systematic judgment errors cannot be dismissed as mere noise
• Systematic judgment errors do not make people unintelligent.
• Tangible personal threat from blacks does not predict opposition to racial policies
• Technological possibility alone will drive genetic self-modification absent moral restraint
• Television news priming shifts which criteria citizens use to rate presidents
• Television news shapes which public problems viewers take seriously
• Temperance shifted from urban-left alliance to small-town-right alliance across a century
• Terror against subordinates ranges along a continuum from legal to tolerated
• Terror attacks change war support only through increased moral disengagement.
• Terrorism aims at political influence through emotional arousal rather than destruction
• Terrorism can be a repeated attempt to master unresolved childhood conflicts
• Terrorism can re-enact unresolved childhood confrontations with parental authority.
• Terrorism can reaffirm ethnic roots rather than stem from identity rejection
• Terrorism emerges from the intersection of disposition and environment, not single personality types
• Terrorism fear drives publics to accept erosion of democratic judicial processes
• Terrorism is defined by its extranormality and symbolic targeting rather than casualties
• Terrorism is not generally a product of mental pathology
• Terrorism lacks a single personality type but still draws on subconscious motives
• Terrorism must escalate in drama and novelty as its audiences grow distant
• Terrorism requires reflective violence and delayed gratification, unlike impulsive aggression
• Terrorism research is too fragmented to build cumulative psychological knowledge
• Terrorism resists a single psychological explanation because it takes many forms
• Terrorism results from predispositions interacting with political context, not personality alone
• Terrorism rewards personality defects that ordinary society punishes.
• Terrorism stems from small-group dynamics rather than abnormal personalities
• Terrorism threat perception in Israel reflects subjective probabilities rather than casualty counts
• Terrorism’s causal effects resist separation from other social phenomena
• Terrorism’s effectiveness depends on strategic selection of direct and indirect audiences
• Terrorism’s impact requires precise tuning to its audiences.
• Terrorism’s political context shapes its motivations and psychological effects
• Terrorism’s political impact exceeds its physical destructiveness via media amplification.
• Terrorism’s psychological effects cannot be cleanly separated from other conflict factors
• Terrorism’s psychological impact depends on perceived intentionality and random anonymity
• Terrorist groups actively screen out emotionally unstable recruits as security risks
• Terrorist groups and cults both strictly regulate members’ sexual relations
• Terrorist groups and religious cults both regulate members’ sexuality to enforce control.
• Terrorist groups function as substitute families meeting unmet developmental needs
• Terrorist groups recruit through family and intimate personal bonds that substitute for kin.
• Terrorist groups substitute for failed family structures and relieve personal responsibility.
• Terrorist groups’ screening practices filter out mentally unstable recruits
• Terrorist leaders are constrained to ideological conformity by their followers’ expectations.
• Terrorist leaders are themselves tightly constrained by group norms and ideology
• Terrorist organizations contain differentiated roles, not just wild-eyed attackers
• Terrorist organizations gain social acceptance when legitimized by national or religious division
• Terrorist role models retain prestige even after their campaigns fail completely
• Terrorist tactics spread and decline through social contagion like other collective fads.
• Terrorist violence can express omnipotence fantasies masking inner impotence and identification with aggressors
• Terrorists are rarely psychopathological, and labeling them so evades political questions
• Terrorists neutralize guilt by abstracting victims into mere institutional representatives.
• Terrorists seek social disapproval that confirms their adopted negative identity.
• Terrorists show no shared psychological attitude pattern toward violence
• The 1988 campaign’s emotional highs and lows were sampled at three politcally distinct moments
• The 200,000-member Anti-Slavery Society reached barely 3-4% of northern adults.
• The 20th century was the bloodiest in human history.
• The Atlas missile’s 1-megaton warhead size reflects decimal counting, not strategy
• The Berkeley authoritarianism study recruited almost exclusively from formal organizational members
• The capacity for evil is latent in everyone and activatable by conversion
• The civil rights movement replaced overt racism with a subtler symbolic form
• The civil-rights era raised ethnic statuses without reordering the ethnic hierarchy
• The concept of inherent evilness is psychologically puzzling because it adds senseless terror
• The consensuality of stereotypes contradicts their origin in individual justification
• The criminal justice system functions as a hierarchy-maintaining instrument
• The Delta experiment varied which voter group allegedly determines the election
• The disadvantaged overestimate the powerful’s capabilities, braking social mobility.
• The distinctive new prejudice is interpreting subordinate demands as illegitimate pushiness
• The doctors found selection more stressful than morally worse acts
• The end of formal racial subordination eliminated the structural basis for blatant biological racism
• The experimental time freed from rent pressure, not entrepreneurial time, produces the new
• The F Scale items derive from fascist writings and clinical interview data
• The F scale measured personality through questionnaires, not explicit ideology like the other scales.
• The F Scale measures implicit authoritarian trends without content-laden items
• The F Scale partly measured a tendency to agree regardless of content
• The F Scale partly measured mere yielding, not authoritarian content
• The F Scale’s nine sub-constructs lack independent psychological reality
• The F Scale’s tie to actual fascist party affiliation was never demonstrated
• The foundational theoretical choice is whether phenomena are contingent or inherent.
• The Great Depression did not reliably produce political violence across countries
• The greatest presidents were least congruent with their society’s motives
• The identical policy pairing flips majority support when status quo moves
• The imbalance of inflicted pain against perpetrator motive defines evil
• The Indian caste system survived 3,000 years despite legal abolition.
• The interview method matured from intuitive art to teachable craft before becoming a science
• The Iran-Contra disclosure sharply dropped Reagan’s poll ratings across major pollsters
• The Iran-Contra scandal primed foreign affairs in public evaluations of Reagan
• The Iran-Contra scandal serves as a test case for priming theory
• The justice system discriminates more against subordinate men than subordinate women
• The least-informed citizens dominate shifts in presidential approval
• The liberal-conservative continuum is an elite abstraction most voters do not use
• The mental-disorder theory of terrorism lacks reliable clinical evidence
• The Moral Majority thrived as a submission-to-authority movement during the late 1970s threat period.
• The most appealing candidates are not usually the most effective leaders
• The nature-nurture question determines whether ending mass violence is even conceivable.
• The Nazi era shaped a generation’s scholarly obligation to study evil.
• The Nazi mass base came from nonvoters, the young, and peasants.
• The need for cognitive simplicity biased early researchers toward equating communism with fascism
• The original authoritarian personality studies suffered from systematic methodological flaws.
• The prejudice versus group conflict debate spans multiple social disciplines.
• The principle-implementation gap holds across jobs, housing, schooling, and accommodations
• The Protestant work ethic is endorsed partly to justify inequality
• The real puzzle is why outgroups stop acquiescing to authority
• The researchers coded interview data flexibly to maximize prejudice discrimination
• The RWA Scale outperformed earlier authoritarianism measures
• The same perceived traits were celebrated or condemned depending on the political regime
• The same psychological typology was praised or damned depending on the political regime
• The scale and momentum of bureaucratic machinery enables resignation to evil.
• The social mobility belief system assumes society is permeable enough for individual escape
• The stigma of treason grows with the intensity of intergroup conflict
• The terror industrial complex now includes social media and private contractors
• The tragedy of the commons logic applies to voting, war, and charity
• The truth of self-reports cannot justify the prejudiced-unprejudiced contrast; probability assumptions underwrite it
• The underprivileged internalize their class position as personal deficiency rather than systemic failure.
• The US Senate’s narrow ideological range cannot fairly test the far-left ideologue hypothesis
• Theory should be a deliberately one-sided tool that risks falsification
• Threat is an intuitive attention-getting device for political learning.
• Threat makes voters abandon partisanship and seek candidate-specific information.
• Threatened privilege, not disadvantage, can also trigger politicized collective identity
• Traditional peasants rebel when markets erode their way of life without offering replacements.
• Traditional segregationist attitudes remain politically relevant even when modern racism is accounted for
• Traditional values and partisanship each correlate weakly with symbolic racism (.27 and .26)
• Treating all political violence as one class may obscure distinct causal types
• Twentieth-century ideologies differ in valuing individual freedom versus social equality.
• Unbiased people naturally adopt crime-commission framing over law-obedience framing
• Unconscious accessibility priming lets scandal coverage shift the foundations of presidential support
• Unconscious aggression drives some traumatized individuals to terrorism while others choose cults or conformity
• Unconscious judgment and system harshness both paradoxically increase system-justification
• Underground organizations screen out mentally unstable recruits
• Understanding both leaders and followers may guard against fascist catastrophe
• Understanding politics fully requires expertise in psychology
• Unemployment’s rate of change, not its level, signals societal threat
• Unintended media prioritization still wields enormous, uneven political power.
• Unintentional editorial priorities still yield enormous political consequences
• Universalist personality theories resist empirical disconfirmation but typological ones do not
• Unrelated evaluation criteria serve as control conditions in a priming natural experiment
• Unsatisfactory group identity drives exit or group improvement efforts
• Upper strata more consistently support rightist parties than lower strata support leftist ones.
• Upper working-class people attribute poverty to lack of caring and willpower
• US authoritarianism indicators rose in the 1930s and late 1960s
• US historical threat spikes raised measurable societal authoritarianism
• US racial history moved through abrupt regime shifts toward formal legal equality
• Utilitarianism defines wrongness purely as inflicting pain on others
• Vague, unidentifiable threats like terrorism prove harder for victims to comprehend or counter
• Vice presidents who inherited the presidency lack usable first-election data.
• Victims prefer self-blame over acknowledging that the world is unfair.
• Vietnam massacres show organizations can make evildoers without top-down orders
• Violation of newly adopted values spurs new social movements among the middle class.
• Violence is more likely when easier and seen as likely to succeed
• Violence is often the best available action for systematically disadvantaged groups
• Violence-prone hierarchies are already destructive machines by design
• Violence’s past use can teach either more violence or its prohibitive cost
• Violent collective action is a normal tactical channel, not aberrant behavior
• Violent collective action is a normal tactical choice, not an aberration.
• Violent disturbance occurred in about one year out of four over two millennia
• Voter confusion about ideology stems from flawed dimensional assumptions, not ignorance
• Voter enthusiasm drives active political involvement beyond passive agreement
• Voter policy positions are barely more stable than pure chance
• Voter preferences respond to framing even when expected values are equal
• Voters can define ideology on wholly different dimensions, not opposite poles
• Voters can hold fundamentally different, not just opposite, ideological meanings
• Voters in stressed systems back change promises without grasping ideology.
• Voters may treat their own vote as diagnostic of millions of like-minded others
• Voters prefer whichever candidate represents the current policy status quo
• Voters punish incumbents in bad times as risk seekers, not as rational appraisal
• Voters reject inflation-cutting policies framed as adding unemployment
• Voters who use ideological terms spontaneously are a small minority
• Voting may be irrational under expected-value calculus unless citizen’s duty supplies extra utility
• Voting turnout rises when a person believes their participation correlates with like-minded peers
• Voting’s low decisive-ballot probability makes it irrational absent citizen-duty benefits
• Wallas argued democratic theory erred by assuming humans reason well.
• War outcomes are unpredictable from force composition comparisons
• We deny sympathetic validity even when we understand an evil act’s impetus
• Wealthier people are more likely to stereotype the poor as lazy
• Whether harm counts as morally wrong depends on context and justification
• Whether perpetrators become permanently ‘doubled’ individuals remains uncertain
• Whether society’s normal state is harmony or conflict is a foundational theoretical choice.
• Which collective identity surfaces depends jointly on readiness and context fit
• White awareness of racial inequality does not translate into support for remedies
• White identity was partly constructed through contrast with the imagined Black other
• White objections to racial change defend group privilege rather than prejudice
• White opposition to racially targeted policies is substantially racially motivated
• White racial beliefs improved dramatically even as policy opposition stayed high
• White racial ideology supports basic rights but opposes change that burdens whites
• White racial ideology supports formal equality while opposing burdensome change
• Whites accept racial equality in principle but reject the measures that would achieve it.
• Whites broadly endorse racial equality in principle yet reject concrete equality policies
• Whites resist equality while constrained by antidiscrimination norms toward bounded change
• Whites resist redistributive racial policies to protect their privileged status.
• Whites support racial equality in principle but resist the policies implementing it
• Whites support racial equality in principle far more than they support policies implementing it.
• Whites supported racial equality only while it cost them nothing personally
• Whites sustain equality-in-principle while delegitimizing redistributive measures as a coherent ideology
• Whites’ support for racial equality principles shrank once implementation threatened their own position
• Whole organizations can turn members into evildoers without the apex directing it
• Wide-range belief systems centered on political objects constitute ideologies.
• Widespread individual exit strategies undermine collective mobilization and perpetuate subordinate status.
• Widespread political negativity can break out far faster than elites expect
• Wilson’s refusal to compromise cost him treaty ratification despite supporters ready to vote
• Wilson’s rigid personality, not the political context, doomed the Versailles Treaty
• Winter’s scoring system lets researchers measure leaders’ motives from public materials only.
• Women’s inferior status relative to men is universal across societies
• Women’s terror participation stems from social frustration, not feminine nature
• Workers concede innate differences justify their lower occupational position
• Workers define class by shared conversational and consumption resources, not formal rank
• Workers derive a sense of power from believing their class is the numerical majority.
• Workers simultaneously deny and endorse money’s power to buy happiness.
• Workers’ claims of equality express self-respect, not moral or spiritual beliefs
• Working class people derive self-worth from their resilience through economic hardship
• Working class people rationalize the status quo through meritocratic beliefs
• Working men internalize self-blame for their own class position.
• Working men tolerate their own status but hope their children will rise above it.
• Working-class Americans here reject the egalitarian founding myth as hypocritical
• Working-class anxieties about upper-class rejection dampen support for equalitarian movements
• Working-class authoritarianism conflicts with fascism’s lower-middle-class narrative
• Working-class individuals often fear equality rather than desire it.
• Working-class men define the poor by pay frequency, housing, and schooling
• Working-class men resist status equality from fear of rejection by superiors
• Working-class men sacrifice pleasure and leisure to hold middle status.
• Working-class men would fear and resent genuine equality of status
• Working-class people define ‘lower class’ by visible daily-life markers not income
• Working-class people desire welfare-state measures while fearing equality itself.
• Working-class people justify large wealth gaps even when they concede income is arbitrary.
• Working-class respondents universally saw equal incomes as destroying life’s incentive
• Working-class voters fear equality and value inequality
• Wrongdoing requires intentional, knowing, or reckless harm
• WWII anti-Nazi propaganda delegitimized racism as antidemocratic
• Yale behaviorists blended Hullian learning theory with psychoanalysis and Marxism
• Yeasaying and authoritarianism are completely independent personality traits
• Yeasaying and naysaying are stable generalized traits tied to impulse control
• Yeasaying bias is completely independent from authoritarianism
• Zero-sum competition over resources produces ethnocentrism and intergroup hostility
• Zero-sum perceptions of economics drive white opposition to affirmative action