No abstract

This study tested the hypothesis that authoritarianism as measured by the California F Scale would be related to both behavioral and self-report measures of subjects' attitudes toward United States involvement in the Vietnam war. In a test of the hypothesis, the F scale and a self-report questionnaire pertaining to the Vietnam war were administered to 131 introductory psychology students. Sixty-five of these students actively demonstrated against United States involvement in the Vietnam war by not attending class on the day of the October 15, 1969 moratorium on the Vietnam war. In support of the hypothesis, these 65 students had significantly lower F-scale scores and had stronger anti-Vietnam war attitudes, as reflected in the self-report questionnaire. Karabenick and Wilson (1969), contrary to prediction, found that dogmatism as measured by Rokeach's (1960) Dogmatism scale was significantly related to subjects' attitudes to the Vietnam war. Specifically, they found that subjects with anti-Vietnam war attitudes were significantly less dogmatic than subjects with pro-Vietnam war attitudes. These results are consistent with those of Barker (1963), who found that persons holding right-wing attitudes are more dogmatic than those holding left-wing attitudes, and those of Guller and Bailes (1968), who also found a significant positive correlation between Dogmatism scale scores and attitudes toward the Vietnam war.Karabenick and Wilson attempted to resolve the inconsistency between their hypothesis and results by pointing out that the Dogmatism scale and authoritarianism as measured by the California F Scale (Adorno, Frenkel-Brunswick, Levinson, & Sanford, 1950) are highly correlated (Rokeach, 1960), and by conceiving of pro-Vietnam war attitudes as corresponding to official government position and anti-Vietnam war attitudes as constituting a break with authority. Thus, Karabenick and Wilson suggest that persons high on the Dogmatism scale would also be high on the F scale and hence hold attitudes consistent with those in authority-namely pro-American involvement in Southeast Asia.

No abstract

No abstract