El objetivo de este trabajo ha sido realizar una evaluación de los factores subyacentes tanto a la ideología política como a nuestras creencias religiosas. Distintas líneas de investigación han puesto de manifiesto las relaciones existentes entre Autoritarismo (Adorno, Frenkel-Brunswick, Levinson y Sandford, 1950; Altemeyer, 1981) y Dominancia Social (Pratto, Sidanius, Stallworth, y Malle, 1994), sin embargo la investigación ha mostrado distintos patrones de relaciones entre muestras norteamericanas y europeas. Nuestros resultados se encuentran en la misma línea que otros estudios europeos, ya que autoritarismo y SDO mostraron una fuerte relación entre sí. Asimismo, encontramos que sólo el autoritarismo guardó relación con las creencias religiosas, mientras que ambas variables se encuentran relacionadas con la ideología política. Finalmente, encontramos que la relación entre autoritarismo, SDO e ideología política es más intensa para aquellos participantes que no han cambiado su voto en los diferentes comicios evaluados, mientras que este patrón de relaciones con la ideología desaparece para aquellos otros participantes que informan de al menos un cambio de opción política elegida.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbramsonP. R. (1975). Generational Change in American Politics.Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
2.
AdornoT. W.Frenkel-BrunswickE.LevinsonD. J.SandfordN. (1950) The authoritarian personality.Buenos Aires: Proyección.
3.
AltemeyerB. (1981). Enemies of freedom.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
4.
AltemeyerB. (1988) Right-wing authoritarianism.Winnipeg: Manitoba University Press.
5.
AltemeyerB. (1994). Reducing prejudice in right-wing authoritarians. EnZannaM. P.OlsonJ. M. (Eds.). The Psychology of Prejudice: The Ontario Symposium7 (pp. 47–92). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
6.
AltemeyerB. (1996). The authoritarian spectra.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
7.
AltemeyerB. (1998). The other ‘authoritarian personality’. En ZannaM. P. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, vol.30 (pp. 47–92). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
8.
BaronR. M.KennyD. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.
9.
BustillosA.Silván-ferreroM. P. (2005). Social dominance and Authoritarianism: Differential mediation with Blatant and Subtle Prejudice.14th General Meeting EAESP. Wuzburg, Alemania.
10.
CohrsJ. C.MoschnerB.MaesJ.KlelmanS. (2005). The motivational Bases of Right-Wing Authoritarianism and Social Dominance Orientation: Relations to Values and Attitudes in Aftermath of September 11, 2001. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31 (10), 1425–1434.
11.
ConverseP. E. (1964). The Nature of belief System in Mass Publics. EnApterD. (Ed.), Ideology and Discontent (pp. 206–261). Nueva York: Free Press.
12.
DuckittJ. (2001). A dual-process cognitive-motivational theory of ideology and prejudice. EnZannaM. P. (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol.33 (pp. 41–113). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
13.
DuckittJ.WagnerC.Du PlessisI.BirumI. (2002). The psychological bases of ideology and prejudice: Testing a dual process model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 75–93.
14.
DuriezB.Van HielA. (2002). The march of modern fascism: A comparison of social dominance orientation and Authoritarianism. Personality and Individual Differences, 32, 1199–1213.
15.
GreensteinF. I. (1965). Children and Politics.New Haven: Yale University Press.
16.
HarriesO. (1984). A Premier for Polemicist. Comentary, 78, 57–60.
17.
HenryP. J.SidaniusJ.LevinS.PrattoF. (2005). Social Dominance Orientation, Authoritarianism, and Support for Intergroup Violence Between the Middle East and America. Political Psychology, 26 (4), 569–583.
18.
HerreraM.SeoaneJ. (1989). Actitudes e ideología política. EnRodríguezA.SeoaneJ. (Eds.), Creencias, actitudes y valores (pp. 409–449). Madrid: Alhambra.
19.
JenningsM.NiemiR. G. (1974). The Political Character of Adolescence: The influence of Families and Schools.Priceton: Priceton University Press.
20.
LaneR. E.SearsD. O. (1964). La opinión pública.Barcelona: Fontanella.
21.
LauferR.ParadieseC. (1990). Marketing Democracy: Public Opinion and Media Formation in Democratic Societies.New Brunswick: Transaction Press
22.
LippaR.AradS. (1999). Gender, personality, and prejudice: The display of authoritarianism and social dominance in interviews with college men and women. Journal of Research in Personality, 33, 463–493.
23.
LazarsfieldP. F.BerelsonB.GaudetH. (1948). The people's choice.Nueva York: Columbia University Press.
MeloenJ. D. (1993). The F-scale as a predictor of Fascism: An overview of 40 years of Authoritarianism research. EnStoneW. F.LedererG.ChristieR. (Eds.), Strength and weakness: The Authoritarian Personality Today (pp. 47–69). Nueva York: springer verlag.
26.
Montes-BergesB.Silván-ferreroM. P. (2004). Dominancia social y neosexismo: Relación con las actitudes hacia los programas de acción afirmativa. Revista de Psicología Social, 19 (3), 275–285.
27.
PetersonB.DotyR. M.WinterD. G. (1993). Authoritarianism and attitudes toward contemporary social issues. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 19 (2), 174–184.
28.
PetersonB.DuncanL. E. (1999). Authoritarianism of parents and offspring. Intergenerational politics and adjustment to college. Journal of Research in Personality, 33 (4), 494–513.
29.
PettigrewT. F.MeertensR. W. (1995). Subtle and blatant prejudice in Western Europe. European Journal of Social Psychology, 25, 57–75.
30.
PrattoF.LiuJ.LevinS.SidaniusJ.ShihM.BrachrachH.HergatyP. (2000). Social dominance orientation and the legitimisation for inequality across cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31, 369–409.
31.
PrattoF.SidaniusJ.StallworthL. M.MalleB. F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A Personality variable relevant to social roles and intergroup relations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 741–763.
32.
PrattoF.StallworthL. M.SidaniusJ.SiersB. (1997). The gender gap in occupational role attainment: A social dominance approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 12, 37–53.
33.
RokeachM. (1968). Beliefs, attitudes and values.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
34.
SabucedoJ. M. (1996). Psicología Política.Madrid: Síntesis.
35.
SchwartzSH. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in experimental social psychology, 25, 1–65.
36.
SidaniusJ.PrattoF. (1999). Social Dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression.Cambridge: University Press.
37.
SidaniusJ.PrattoF.BoboL. (1994). Social dominance orientation and the political psychology of gender: A case of invariance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67 (6), 998–1100.
38.
SidaniusJ.PrattoF.BoboL. (1996). Racism, conservatism, affirmative action and intellectual sophistication: A matter of principled conservatism or group dominance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 476–490.
39.
SidaniusJ.PrattoF.BriefD. (1994). Group dominance and the political psychology of gender: A cross-cultural comparison. Political Psychology, 16, 381–396.
40.
SidaniusJ.PrattoF.Van LaarC.LevinS. (2004). The social dominance Theory: Its Agenda and Method. Political Psychology, 25 (6), 845–800.
41.
Silván-ferreroM. P.BustillosA. (2007). Adaptación de la escala de Orientación a la Dominancia Social al castellano: validación de la Dominancia Grupal y la Oposición a la Igualdad como factores subyacentes. Revista de Psicología Social, 22 (1), 3–15.
42.
SobelM. E. (1982). Asymptotic intervals for indirect effects in structural equations models. EnLeinhartS. (Ed.), Sociological methodology (pp. 290–312). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
43.
Van HielA.MervieldeI. (2002). Explaining conservative beliefs and political preferences: A comparison of social dominance orientation and authoritarianism. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 965–976.
44.
Van HielA.PandelaereM.DuriezB. (2004). The impact of need for closure on conservative beliefs and racism: Differential mediation by authoritarian submission and authoritarian dominance. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 30 (7), 824–837.
45.
VausD. A. (2002). Social surveys: an overview. EnVausD. A. (Ed.), Social Surveys, vol.1 (pp. 1–36). Londres: Sage Publications.
46.
WhitleyB. E. (1999). Right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, and prejudice.Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 77 (1), 126–134.
47.
ZickA.PetzelT. (1999). Authoritarianism, racism and ideologies about acculturation. Politics, Groups and the individual, 8, 41–64.
