No abstract

Based on the assumption that disclosing explicit populist radical-right (PRR) attitudes and voting intentions for PRR parties may be inhibited by a social desirability bias, this paper aims at developing a measure for implicit populist attitudes (IAT) and at assessing its explanatory power for the prediction of PRR party support. Using data from a German online survey (N = 898), the populism-IAT is tested against corresponding direct measures of populist attitudes and anti-immigrant attitudes to predict voting propensity for the German PRR party Alternative für Deutschland (AfD). Results reveal that social desirability concerns indeed restrict the likelihood of reporting a high propensity of PRR vote; however, direct measures turn out as best predictors for self-reported voting intentions. Inconsistencies between implicit and explicit attitudes may indicate sensitivity to social (un-)desirability perceptions, when attitudes are displayed on the implicit but not on the explicit level. We find such incongruencies for 9% of our respondents regarding populist attitudes, and for 21% regarding anti-immigrant attitudes, indicating that the latter are considered even more undesirable. In light of our findings, we discuss the potential explanatory power of implicit attitudes for less deliberate forms of political behavior and the assumption of populist and anti-immigrant attitudes still being regarded as socially undesirable in Germany.

We conceptualize and measure right‐wing populism (RWP) as a three‐dimensional concept, explicitly and implicitly, based on online surveys and implicit association tests (IATs) in Germany and Switzerland. Confirmatory factor analyses show that explicit populism, nativism, and authoritarianism establish the latent RWP‐construct and that they are each related to their respective implicit counterpart. However, RWP ideology does not exist as an equally robust construct in the implicit realm as it does in the explicit realm. Resulting implicit‐explicit incongruence is psychologically meaningful in that it is moderated by willingness to comply with perceived social norms: For participants who perceive that their own political views differ from their social environment and who conceal their diverging opinions, implicit attitudes differ more strongly from explicit attitudes. This supports our rationale that explicit expression of RWP‐ideology is subject to social‐compatibility concerns. Hence, corresponding implicit attitudes are useful to fully assess the RWP potential within society.

Most people have one or more favorite pieces of media entertainment (e.g., movies, TV shows, novels, video games), and some personal candidates for the worst of them ever. But how exactly are such evaluative judgments formed? What are the underlying psychological processes of media entertainment evaluations? And why do we sometimes feel that the heart and mind are in conflict about those evaluations? To cover the whole complexity of individual media entertainment ratings, we apply the associative–propositional evaluation (APE) model (Gawronski & Bodenhausen, 2006a, 2011) to the case of movie evaluation processes before, during and after exposure. After defining evaluation and introducing the APE model, we discuss its theoretical and methodological implications for movies and entertainment research. Moreover, we highlight similarities and differences concerning common related concepts (e.g., enjoyment).

No abstract