Elites degrade democracy in part because of incentives that arise from public opinion. We report pre-registered and exploratory tests of which Americans are most likely to support democracy-degrading action, focusing on three distinct democracy attitudes assessed in a large demographically representative sample 5 weeks before the 2020 election. Professed opposition to democracy was relatively rare and most common among citizens who felt disengaged with politics. But a different pattern of findings emerged for attitudes toward (1) flagrant, politically congenial authoritarian policy action and (2) election subversion framed with a pro-democracy justification. These anti-democratic attitudes were relatively common, related to cultural conservatism among both Republicans and Democrats, and – consistent with an “involved-but-ignorant” hypothesis – highest among those who combined strong political interest with low political sophistication. We recommend an increased focus on attitudes toward flagrant, contextualized, and politically cued authoritarian actions, including actions framed in pro-democracy terms.
AdornoT.Frenkel-BrenswikE.LevinsonD. J.SanfordR. N. (1950). The authoritarian personality. Harper.
2.
AltemeyerB. (1988). Enemies of freedom: Understanding right-wing authoritarianism. Jossey-Blass Publishers.
3.
BakkerB. N.RooduijnM.SchumacherG. (2016). The psychological roots of populist voting: Evidence from the United States, The Netherlands and Germany. European. Journal of Political Research, 55(2), 302–320. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12121
4.
BarroJ. (2017). Trump produces enough real risks, so stop imagining fake ones. Business Insider.
5.
BartelsL. M. (2020). Ethnic antagonism erodes republicans’ commitment to democracy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(37), 22752–22759. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2007747117
6.
BraleyA.LenzG.AdjodahD.RahnamaH.PentlandA. (2021). The subversion dilemma: Why voters who cherish democracy vote it away. Institut for Statskundskab.
7.
BroockmanD.KallaJ.WestwoodS. (in press). Does affective polarization undermine democratic norms or accountability? Maybe not. American Journal of Political Science.
8.
CarminesE G.EnsleyM. J.WagnerM. W. (2016). Ideological heterogeneity and the rise of Donald Trump. The Forum, 14(4), 385–397. https://doi.org/10.1515/for-2016-0036
9.
ClaassenC. (2020). Does public support help democracy survive?American Journal of Political Science, 64(1), 118–134. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12452
10.
CoppockA.McClellanO. A. (2019). Validating the demographic, political, psychological, and experimental results obtained from a new source of online survey respondents. Research & Politics, 6(1), 2053168018822174. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053168018822174
11.
CostelloT. H.BowesS. M.StevensS. T.WaldmanI. W.TasimiA.LilienfeldS. O. (2021). Clarifying the structure and nature of left-wing authoritarianism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 122(1), 135–170. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000341
12.
CostelloT. H.LilienfeldS. O. (2020). Social and economic political ideology consistently operate as mutual suppressors: Implications for personality, social, and political psychology. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 12(8), 1425–1436. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550620964679
EggersA. C.GarroH.GrimmerJ. (2021). No evidence for systematic voter fraud: A guide to statistical claims about the 2020 election. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(45), e2103619118.
GrahamM. H.SvolikM. W. (2020). Democracy in America? partisanship, polarization, and the robustness of support for democracy in the United States. American Political Science Review, 114(2), 392–409. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055420000052
KalmoeN. P.MasonL. (2022). Radical American partisanship: Mapping violent hostility, its causes, and the consequences for democracy. University of Chicago Press.
25.
Kiewiet de JongeC. P. (2016). Should researchers abandon questions about ‘democracy’? Evidence from Latin America. Public Opinion Quarterly, 80(3), 694–716. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfw008
26.
KirschH.WelzelC. (2019). Democracy misunderstood: Authoritarian notions of democracy around the globe. Social Forces, 98(1), 59–92. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soy114
27.
LefkofridiZ.MichelE. (2017). The electoral politics of solidarity: The welfare agendas of radical right parties. In BantingK.KymlickaW. (Eds.), The strains of commitment: The political sources of solidarity in diverse societies (pp. 233–267). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198795452.003.0009
28.
LudekeS.JohnsonW.BouchardT. J.Jr. (2013). Obedience to traditional authority: A heritable factor underlying authoritarianism, conservatism and religiousness. Personality and Individual Differences, 55(4), 375–380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.03.018
29.
MalkaA.AdelmanM. (2022). Expressive survey responding: A closer look at the evidence and its implications for American democracy. Perspectives on Politics, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592721004096
MalkaA.LelkesY.BakkerB. N.SpivackE. (2020). Who is open to authoritarian governance within western democracies?Perspectives on Politics, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592720002091
32.
McCloskyH. (1964). Consensus and ideology in American politics. American Political Science Review, 58(2), 361–382. https://doi.org/10.2307/1952868
33.
McCoyJ.RahmanT.SomerM. (2018). Polarization and the global crisis of democracy: Common patterns, dynamics, and pernicious consequences for democratic polities. American Behavioral Scientist, 62(1), 16–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764218759576
34.
MillerS. V.DavisN. T. (2020). The effect of white social prejudice on support for American democracy. Journal of Race, Ethnicity, and Politics, 6(2), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1017/rep.2019.55
35.
NorrisP. (2011). Democratic deficit: Critical citizens revisited. Cambridge University Press.
36.
PetersenM. B.OsmundsenM.BorA.2020. “Beyond Populism: The Psychology of Status-Seeking and Extreme Political Discontent.” Chap. 4 in The Psychology of Populism, eds. Joseph Forgas, Bill Crano, and Klaus Fiedler. Routledge.
37.
PriorM.SoodG.KhannaK. (2015). You Cannot Be Serious: The Impact of Accuracy Incentives on Partisan Bias in Reports of Economic Perceptions. Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 104, 489–518.
38.
ProthroJ. W.GriggC. M. (1960). Fundamental principles of democracy: Bases of agreement and disagreement. The Journal of Politics, 22(2), 276–294. https://doi.org/10.2307/2127359
39.
QiL.ShinD. C. (2011). How Mass Political Attitudes Affect Democratization: Exploring the Facilitating Role Critical Democrats Play in the Process. International Political Science Review, 32(3), 245–62.
40.
SimonovitsG.McCoyJ.LittvayL. (2022). Democratic hypocrisy and out-group threat: explaining citizen support for democratic erosion. The Journal of Politics, 84(3), 1806–1811.
41.
SullivanJ. L.PieresonJ.MarcusG. E. (1983). Political tolerance and American democracy. University of Chicago Press.
ZechmeisterE. J (2018). Should we be alarmed that one-in-four U.S. citizens believes a military take-over can be justifiable?Latin American Public Opinion Project. https://www.vanderbilt.edu/lapop/insights/IMN001en.pdf
47.
ZmigrodL.EisenbergI. W.BissettP. G.RobbinsT. W.PoldrackR. A. (2021). The cognitive and perceptual correlates of ideological attitudes: A data-driven approach. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 376(1822), 20200424. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2020.0424
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.
