Adorno, T.W., et al. (1950). The Authoritarian Personality. New York, Harper.
2.
Christie, R. and Jahoda, M. (1954). Studies in the Scope and Method of the Authoritarian Personality. Free Press of Glencoe.
3.
Erikson, E.H. (1942). 'Hitler's Imagery and German Youth'. Psychiatry. 5, 475-93.
4.
Gump, P.V. (1953). 'Anti-democratic Trends and Student Reaction to President Truman's Dismissal of General McArthur'. J. Soc. Psych.38, 131-5.
5.
Labovitz, S. (1967). 'Some Observations on Measurement and Statistics '. Social Forces. 46, 151-60.
6.
Levinson, D.J. and Sanford, R.N. (1944). 'A Scale for the Measurement of Anti-Semitism' . The J. of Psychol. 17, 339-70.
7.
Milton, O. (1952). 'Presidential Choice and Performance on a Scale of Authoritarianism'. Amer. Psychologist. 7, 597-8.
8.
Myrdal, G. (1944). An American Dilemma. New York , Harper.
9.
Samuel, M. (1940). The Great Hatred. New York , Alfred A. Knopf.
10.
Spearman, Diana (1968). 'Enoch Powell's Postbag'. New Society. 9 May 1968, 667-9.
11.
Titus, H.E., and Hollander, P. (1957). 'The F-scale in Psychology'. Psychological Bulletin.54, 47-64.
12.
See Spearman (1965), p. 667.
13.
See Spearman, op cit., p. 668.
14.
The generality of in-group and out-group ideology within the individual has been noted by both social scientists and historians for several decades, see for instance: Erikson (1942), Myrdal (1944), Samuel (1940). Quantitative data have been presented by Levinson and Sanford (1944), and Adorno et al. (1950).
15.
Adorno et al., op cit., Chapter VII.
16.
Adorno et al., op cit., p. 248-9.
17.
For an overview of the literature that has emerged since the Californian study, see, for instance, Titus and Hollander (1957); for methodological discussions on this Californian study, see Christie and Jahoda (1954).
18.
Adorno et al., op cit., pp. 110-11, and pp. 226-7.
19.
For an extended description of the D.P. technique as a technique for item analysis, see Adorno et al., op cit., pp. 77f.
