In three convenience samples (combined N = 3,755) and one nationally representative survey (N = 1,500), we investigated whether and how right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO) were associated with support for Donald Trump during the 2016 U.S. presidential election. In all samples, facets of RWA and SDO predicted support for Trump (compared to other Republican, Democratic, and Libertarian candidates), even after adjusting for demographic factors and religious affiliation. In comparison with supporters of other Republican candidates, Trump supporters were consistently higher in group-based dominance and authoritarian aggression (but not submission or conventionalism). These results highlight the real-world significance of psychological theories and constructs and establish that Trump voters were uniquely driven by the desire to dominate out-group members in an aggressive manner.
AdornoT.Frenkel-BrunswickE.LevinsonD.SanfordR. (1950). The authoritarian personality. New York, NY: Harper.
2.
AltemeyerB. (1981). Right-wing authoritarianism. Winnipeg, Canada: University of Manitoba Press.
3.
AltemeyerB. (1998). The other “authoritarian personality.” In ZannaM. P. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 47–92). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60382-2
4.
AltemeyerB. (2006). The authoritarians. Winnipeg, Canada: Bob Altemeyer.
5.
AzevedoF.JostJ. T.RothmundT. (2017). “Making America great again”: System justification in the U.S. presidential election of 2016. Translational Issues in Psychological Science, 3, 231–240.
BenjaminA. J. (2016). Right-wing authoritarianism and attitudes towards torture. Social Behavior and Personality, 44, 881–888. doi:10.2224/sbp.2016.44.881
ChomaB. L.HanochY. (2017). Cognitive ability and authoritarianism: Understanding support for Trump and Clinton. Personality and Individual Differences, 106, 287–291. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2016.10.054
10.
CurranP. J.HussongA. M. (2009). Integrative data analysis: The simultaneous analysis of multiple data sets. Psychological Methods, 14, 81–100. doi:10.1037/a0015914
11.
DuckittJ. (2001). A dual-process cognitive-motivational theory of ideology and prejudice. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 41–113. doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(01)80004-6
12.
DuckittJ.BizumicB.KraussS. W.HeledE. (2010). A tripartite approach to rightwing authoritarianism: The authoritarianism-conservatism-traditionalism model. Political Psychology, 31, 685–715. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2010.00781.x
13.
FunkeF. (2005). The dimensionality of right-wing authoritarianism: Lessons from the dilemma between theory and measurement. Political Psychology, 26, 195–218.
GreeneJ. (2013). Moral tribes: Emotion, reason, and the gap between us and them. New York, NY: Penguin Press.
17.
GuimondS.DambrunM.MichinovN.DuarteS. (2003). Does social dominance generate prejudice? Integrating individual and contextual determinants of intergroup cognitions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 697–721. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.697
18.
HeatheringtonM. J.WeilerJ. D. (2009). Authoritarianism and polarization in American politics. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
19.
HoA. K.SidaniusJ.PrattoF.LevinS.ThomsenL.KteilyN.Sheehy-SkeffingtonJ. (2012). Social dominance orientation: Revisiting the structure and function of a variable predicting social and political attitudes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 583–606. doi:10.1177/0146167211432765
20.
HoA. K.SidaniusJ.KteilyN.Sheehy-SkeffingtonJ.PrattoF.HenkelK. E.…StewartA. L. (2015). The nature of social dominance orientation: Theorizing and measuring preferences for intergroup inequality using the new SDO7 scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109, 1003–1028. doi:10.1037/pspi0000033
JostJ. T.GlaserJ.KruglanskiA. W.SullowayF. J. (2003). Conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 339–375
23.
JostJ. T.ThompsonE. P. (2000). Group-based dominance and opposition to equality as independent predictors of self-esteem, ethnocentrism, and social policy attitudes among African Americans and European Americans. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 209–232. doi:10.1006/jesp.1999.1403
24.
JostJ. T.WestT. V.GoslingS. D. (2009). Personality and ideology as determinants of candidate preferences and “Obama conversion” in the 2008 U.S. presidential election. Du Bois Review, 6, 103–124.
KuglerM. B.CooperJ.NosekB. A. (2010). Group-based dominance and opposition to equality correspond to different psychological motives. Social Justice Research, 23, 117–155. doi:10.1007/s11211-010-0112-5
27.
KnappG.HartungJ. (2003). Improved tests for a random effects meta-regression with a single covariate. Statistics in Medicine, 22, 2693–2710. doi:10.1002/sim.1482
28.
KteilyN.BruneauE. (2017). Backlash: The politics and real-world consequences of minority group dehumanization. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43, 87–104. doi:10.1177/0146167216675334
29.
LudekeS. G.KlitgaardC. N.VitriolJ. (2018). Comprehensively-measured authoritarianism does predict vote choice: The importance of authoritarianism’s facets, ideological sorting, and the particular candidate. Personality and Individual Differences, 123, 209–216. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2017.11.019
PassiniS. (2008). Exploring the multidimensional facets of authoritarianism: Authoritarian aggression and social dominance orientation. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 67, 51–60. doi:10.1024/1421-0185.67.1.51
34.
PettigrewT. (2017). Social psychological perspectives on Trump supporters. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 5. doi:10.5964/jspp.v5i1.750
35.
PrattoF.SidaniusL. M.StallworthL.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
SibleyC. G.DuckittJ. (2009). Big-five personality, social worldviews, and ideological attitudes: Further tests of a dual process cognitive-motivational model. The Journal of Social Psychology, 149, 545–561. doi:10.1080/00224540903232308
39.
SidaniusJ.PrattoF. (1999). Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
40.
SmithD. N.HanleyE. (2018). The anger games: Who voted for Donald Trump and why?Critical Sociology, 44, 195–212. doi:10.1177/0896920517740615
WeberC.FredericoC. M. (2007). Interpersonal attachment and patterns of ideological belief. Political Psychology, 28, 389–416. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2007.00579.x
47.
WilsonM. S.SibleyC. G. (2013). Social dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism: Additive and interactive effects on political conservatism. Political Psychology, 34, 277–284. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2012.00929.x
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.
