Liberals and conservatives disagree about obeying authorities, with conservatives holding the more positive views. We suggest that reactions to conservative authorities, rather than to obedience itself, are responsible for the division. Past findings that conservatives favor obedience uniformly confounded obedience with conservative authorities. We break down obedience to authority into its constituent parts to test the divisiveness of each part. The concepts of obedience (Study 1) and authority (Study 2) recruited inferences of conservative authorities, conflating results of simple, seemingly face valid tests of their divisiveness. These results establish necessary features of a valid test, to which Study 3 conforms. Conservatives have the more positive moral views of obedience only when the authorities are conservative (e.g., commanding officers); liberals do when the authorities are liberal (e.g., environmentalists). The two camps agree about obeying ideologically neutral authorities (e.g., office managers). Obedience itself is not ideologically divisive.
AllenV.WilderD. (1975). Categorization, belief similarity, and intergroup discrimination. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 971-977. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.32.6.971
2.
AltemeyerB. (2004). The other “authoritarian personality.” In JostJ. T.SidaniusJ. (Eds.), Political psychology: Key readings (pp. 85-107). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
3.
BilligM. (1973). Normative communication in a minimal intergroup situation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 3, 339-343. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420030312
4.
BrandtM. J.ReynaC.ChambersJ. R.CrawfordJ.WetherellG. (2014). The ideological conflict hypothesis: Intolerance among both liberals and conservatives. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23, 27-34. doi:10.1177/0963721413510932
5.
BrewerM. (2007). The importance of being we: Human nature and intergroup relations. The American Psychologist, 62, 726-738. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.62.8.728
6.
ChambersJ.SchlenkerB.CollissonB. (2013). Ideology and prejudice: The role of value conflicts. Psychological Science, 24, 140-149. doi:10.1177/0956797612447820
7.
CrawfordJ. T.PilanskiJ. M. (in press). Political intolerance, right and left. Political Psychology. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2012.00926.x
8.
DavisD. (Producer, Director), & TalbotS. (Producer, Director). (2005). The sixties: The years that shaped a generation [Motion picture]. United States: Oregon Public Broadcasting. Retrieved from http://www.pbs.org/opb/thesixties/
9.
EffersonC.LaliveR.FehrE. (2008). The coevolution of cultural groups and ingroup favoritism. Science, 321, 1844-1849. doi:10.1126/science.1155805
10.
GrahamJ.HaidtJ.NosekB. A. (2009). Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 1029-1046. doi:10.1037/a0015141
11.
GrayK.ScheinC.WardA. F. (in press). The myth of harmless wrongs in moral cognition: Automatic dyadic completion from sin to suffering. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General.
12.
GrayK.YoungL.WaytzA. (2012). Mind perception is the essence of morality. Psychological Inquiry, 23, 101-124. doi:10.1080/1047840X.2012.651387
13.
HaidtJ. (2012). The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion. London, England: Allen Lane.
14.
HaslamS.ReicherS. D. (2012). Contesting the ‘nature’ of conformity: What Milgram and Zimbardo’s studies really show. Plos Biology, 10. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001426
15.
Janoff-BulmanR.CarnesN. C. (2013). Surveying the moral landscape: Moral motives and group-based moralities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 17, 219-236. doi:10.1177/1088868313480274
JostJ. T.BanajiM. R.NosekB. A. (2004). A decade of System Justification Theory: Accumulated evidence of conscious and unconscious bolstering of the status quo. Political Psychology, 25, 881-919. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00402.x
18.
JostJ. T.GlaserJ.KruglanskiA. W.SullowayF. J. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 339-375. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.3.339
19.
LakoffG. (2002). Moral politics: How liberals and conservatives think (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
20.
McCloskyH.ChongD. (1985). Similarities and differences between left-wing and right-wing radicals. British Journal of Political Science, 15, 329-363. doi:10.1017/S0007123400004221
21.
McCraeR. R. (1996). Social consequences of experiential openness. Psychological Bulletin, 120, 323-337. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.120.3.323
22.
McFarlandS.AgeyevV.Abalakina-PaapM. (1992). Authoritarianism in the former Soviet Union. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 1004-1010. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.63.6.1004
PiurkoY.SchwartzS. H.DavidovE. (2011). Basic personal values and the meaning of left-right political orientations in 20 countries. Political Psychology, 32, 537-561. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2011.00828
25.
PrattoF.SidaniusJ.StallworthL. M.MalleB. F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 741-763. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.67.4.741
26.
ReicherS.HaslamS. A. (2011). After shock? Towards a social identity explanation of the Milgram “obedience” studies. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50(Pt. 1), 163-169. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.2010.02015.x
SachdevI.BourhisR. (1984). Minimal majorities and minorities. European Journal of Social Psychology, 14, 35-52. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420140104
29.
SchwartzS. H.CapraraG. V.VecchioneM. (2010). Basic personal values, core political values, and voting: A longitudinal analysis. Political Psychology, 31, 421-452. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2010.00764.x
30.
SherifM.HarveyO. J.WhiteB. J.HoodW. R.SherifC. W. (1961). Intergroup conflict and cooperation: The Robbers’ Cave experiment. Norman: Institute of Group Relations, University of Oklahoma.
31.
SibleyC. G.DuckittJ. (2008). Personality and prejudice: A meta-analysis and theoretical review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12, 248-279. doi:10.1177/1088868308319226
32.
SkitkaL.BaumanC. (2008). Moral conviction and political engagement. Political Psychology, 29, 29-54. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2007.00611.x
33.
SowellT. (2002). A conflict of visions: The ideological origins of political struggles. New York, NY: Basic Books.
34.
StennerK. (2005). The authoritarian dynamic. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511614712
35.
WetherellG.BrandtM. J.ReynaC. (2013). Discrimination across the ideological divide: The role of perceptions of value violations and abstract values in discrimination by liberals and conservatives. Social Psychology and Personality Science, 4, 658-667. doi:10.1177/1948550613476096
36.
YokotaK. (2009). Intergroups threat and intragroup interdependence: Multiplicity of psychological processes behind ingroup favoritism, and their distinct elicitors. Japanese Journal of Psychology, 80, 246-251.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
