Citation

Rickert EJ. Polit. Psychol. 1998; 19(4): 707-720.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1998, International Society of Political Psychology, Publisher John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

10.1111/0162-895X.00128

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

This study examined whether authoritarians experiencing economic threat are more likely than other authoritarians to support social policy and political agendas that restrict benefits or curtail rights for disadvantaged groups. A sample of 131 college students completed questionnaires that measured authoritarianism, degree of economic and societal insecurity, and attitudes toward eight political issues. Economic and social insecurity were indexed to perceptions of whether one's standard of livingg had declined, whether incom inequality had grown among social classes, and whether crime, race relations, environmental quality, and governmental services had worsened. The political scales reflected issues currently debated in public forums; they included funding mechanisms for social security and health care, the state's role in regulating abortion, government services for illegal immigrants, terminating welfare for unemployed women with children, and regulation of sexual conduct. A logistic model found that, relative to non-threatened authoritarians or nonauthoritarians, threatened authoritarians were six times as likely to favor restricting benefits to powerless groups and eight times as likely to support the state's preventing women from securing anabortion. These results are discussed in terms of systemic changes in the economy that have resulted in declines in real income and increasing income inequality.

Language: en