Decades of research suggest a correlation between belief in a dangerous world and political conservatism. However, research relied on a scale that may overemphasize certain types of dangers. Furthermore, few other world beliefs have been investigated, such that fundamental worldview differences between liberals and conservatives remain largely unknown. A preregistered study of nine samples (N = 5,461; mostly US Americans) found a negligible association between a newly improved measure of generalized dangerous world belief and conservatism, and that the original scale emphasized certain dangers more salient to conservatives (e.g., societal decline) over others most salient for liberals (e.g., injustice). Across many measures of political attitudes, other world beliefs—such as beliefs that the world is Hierarchical, Intentional, Just, and Worth Exploring—each explained several times more variance than dangerous world belief. This suggests the relevance of dangerous world belief to political attitudes has been overstated, and examining other world beliefs may yield insights.
AdornoT. W.Frenkel-BrunswikE.LevinsonD. J.SanfordR. N. (1950). The authoritarian personality. Harper & Row.
2.
AltemeyerB. (1981). Right-wing authoritarianism. University of Manitoba press.
3.
AltemeyerB. (1988). Enemies of freedom: Understanding right-wing authoritarianism. Jossey-Bass.
4.
BakkerB. N.SchumacherG.GothreauC.ArceneauxK. (2020). Conservatives and liberals have similar physiological responses to threats. Nature Human Behaviour, 4(6), 613–621.
BrandtM. J.Turner-ZwinkelsF. M.KarapirinlerB.Van LeeuwenF.BenderM.van OschY.AdamsB. (2021). The association between threat and politics depends on the type of threat, the political domain, and the country. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 47(2), 324–343. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167220946187
7.
CliftonJ. D. W.BakerJ. D.ParkC. L.YadenD. B.CliftonA. B. W.TerniP.MillerJ. L.ZengG.GiorgiS.SchwartzH. A.SeligmanM. E. P. (2019). Primal world beliefs. Psychological Assessment, 31(1), 82–99. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000639
8.
ConwayL. G.IIIWoodardS. R.ZubrodA.ChanL. (2021). Why are conservatives less concerned about the coronavirus (COVID-19) than liberals? Comparing political, experiential, and partisan messaging explanations. Personality and Individual Differences. 183, 111124.
9.
CookC. L.LiY. J.NewellS. M.CottrellC. A.NeelR. (2018). The world is a scary place: Individual differences in belief in a dangerous world predict specific intergroup prejudices. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 21(4), 584–596. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430216670024
10.
CrandallC. S. (1994). Prejudice against fat people: Ideology and self-interest. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(5), 882–894.
11.
CrawfordJ. T. (2017). Are conservatives more sensitive to threat than liberals? It depends on how we define threat and conservatism. Social Cognition, 35, 354–373.
12.
CrowsonH. M. (2009). Does the DOG Scale measure dogmatism? Another look at construct validity. The Journal of Social Psychology, 149(3), 265–283. https://doi.org/10.3200/SOCP.149.3.365-383
13.
DallagoF.MirisolaA.RoccatoM. (2012). Predicting right-wing authoritarianism via personality and dangerous world beliefs: Direct, indirect, and interactive effects. The Journal of Social Psychology, 152(1), 112–127.
14.
DeLucaJ. S.VaccaroJ.SedaJ.YanosP. T. (2018). Political attitudes as predictors of the multiple dimensions of mental health stigma. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 64(5), 459–469. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020764018776335
15.
DuckittJ. (2001). A dual-process cognitive-motivational theory of ideology and prejudice. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 41–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0065-2601(01)80004-6
16.
DuckittJ.FisherK. (2003). The impact of social threat on worldview and ideological attitudes. Political Psychology, 24(1), 199–222.
17.
DuckittJ.SibleyC. G. (2009). A dual-process motivational model of ideology, politics, and prejudice. Psychological Inquiry, 20(2–3), 98–109. https://doi.org/10.1080/10478400903028540
18.
EadehF. R.ChangK. K. (2020). Can threat increase support for liberalism? New insights into the relationship between threat and political attitudes. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 11(1), 88–96.
19.
FedericoC. M.HuntC. V.ErgunD. (2009). Political expertise, social worldviews, and ideology: Translating “Competitive Jungles” and “Dangerous Worlds” into ideological reality. Social Justice Research, 22, 259–279. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-009-0097-0
20.
FurnhamA. (2003). Belief in a just world: Research progress over the past decade. Personality and Individual Differences, 34(5), 795–817.
21.
GrahamJ.HaidtJ.NosekB. A. (2009). Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(5), 1029–1046. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015141
22.
HibbingJ. R.SmithK. B.AlfordJ. R. (2014). Differences in negativity bias underlie variations in political ideology. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 37, 297–350. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X13001192
23.
Janoff-BulmanR. (2009). To provide or protect: Motivational bases of political liberalism and conservatism. Psychological Inquiry, 20(2–3), 120–128.
JostJ. T.GlaserJ.KruglanskiA. W.SullowayF. J. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129(3), 339–375. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.3.339
26.
KahnD. T.BjörklundF.HirschbergerG. (2021). The intent and extent of collective threats: A data-driven conceptualization of collective threats and their relation to political preferences. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 151(5), 1178–1198. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000868
27.
KerryN.AiringtonZ.MurrayD. R. (2020). Cultures of fear: Individual differences in perception of physical (but not disease) threats predict cultural neophobia in both immigrant and mainstream Americans. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 6, 335–345.
28.
KerryN.MurrayD. R. (2020). Politics and parental care: Experimental and mediational tests of the causal link between parenting motivation and social conservatism. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 11(2), 284–292. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550619853598
29.
LavineH.BurgessD.SnyderM.TransueJ.SullivanJ. L.HaneyB.WagnerS. H. (1999). Threat, authoritarianism, and voting: An investigation of personality and persuasion. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25(3), 337–347.
30.
McFarlandS. G. (2005). On the eve of war: Authoritarianism, social dominance, and American students’ attitudes toward attacking Iraq. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(3), 360–367. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167204271596
31.
MurrayD. R.KerryN.GervaisW. M. (2019). On disease and deontology: Multiple tests of the influence of disease threat on moral vigilance. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 10(1), 44–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617733518
32.
OosterhoffB. (2015). Dimensions of political reasoning: Associations among informational assumptions, sociopolitical values, and domain-specific judgments about laws [Doctoral dissertation, West Virginia University].
33.
OxleyD. R.SmithK. B.AlfordJ. R.HibbingM. V.MillerJ. L.ScaloraM.HatemiP. K.HibbingJ. R. (2008). Political attitudes vary with physiological traits. Science, 321(5896), 1667–1670.
34.
ParkJ. H.IsherwoodE. (2011). Effects of concerns about pathogens on conservatism and anti-fat prejudice: Are they mediated by moral intuitions?Journal of Social Psychology, 151(4), 391–394. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2010.481692
35.
PerryR.SibleyC. G.DuckittJ. (2013). Dangerous and competitive worldviews: A meta-analysis of their associations with Social Dominance Orientation and Right-Wing Authoritarianism. Journal of Research in Personality, 47(1), 116–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2012.10.004
36.
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(4), 741–763. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.4.741
37.
RosseelY. (2012). Lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48, 1–36.
38.
ShookN. J.Taylor BoggsS.FordC. G.BoggsS. T. (2017). Dangerous worldview: A mediator of the relation between disgust sensitivity and social conservatism. Personality and Individual Differences, 119, 252–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.07.027
39.
StroebeW.LeanderN. P.KruglanskiA. W. (2017). Is it a dangerous world out there? The motivational bases of American gun ownership. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43(8), 1071–1085. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167217703952
40.
van LeeuwenF.ParkJ. H. (2009). Perceptions of social dangers, moral foundations, and political orientation. Personality and Individual Differences, 47(3), 169–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.02.017
41.
WalkerD. A. (2003). JMASM9: Converting Kendall s tau for correlational or meta-analytic analyses. Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods, 2(2), 525–530. https://doi.org/10.22237/jmasm/1067646360
WhiteK. R. G.KinneyD.DanekR. H.SmithB.HarbenC. (2020). The Resistance to Change-Beliefs Scale: Validation of a new measure of conservative ideology. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 46(1), 20–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167219841624
44.
WhitleyB. E.Jr. (1999). Right-Wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(1), 126.
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.
