Authoritarianism, social dominance, and misperceptions of war.

Abstract

Previous research shows that a large segment of the U.S. population has maintained factually inaccurate beliefs concerning Iraq for at least a decade after the start of the Iraq war. These beliefs were maintained despite the fact that significant press coverage challenged them, a bipartisan Senate committee denounced them, and no new convincing evidence has surfaced to support them. The authors believe that 2 ideological preferences, authoritarianism and social dominance orientation, provide the motivational mechanisms for individuals to adopt and maintain factually inaccurate beliefs because such beliefs are consistent with their preferences. The authors combine and extend previous research by examining the relationships between authoritarianism and social dominance, the holding of factual misperceptions years after the U.S. military entered Iraq in 2003, and support for the Iraq war and a broader foreign policy of preemption. Using a student sample, they found that those higher in authoritarianism and social dominance orientation held more misperceptions about the Iraq war, which, in turn, predicted support for military engagement in Iraq and for a broader preemptive military policy. The number of misperceptions held partially mediated the effect of authoritarianism and social dominance orientation on support for war. These factual misperceptions serve as justifications for individuals to express their preexisting preferences. This bias makes factually inaccurate perceptions regarding support for war relatively immutable once adopted.

Understanding the Education-Related Needs of Contemporary Male Veterans

“…It is important for college students to connect with faculty and staff as campus connections have been linked with healthy adjustment to college and academic success (Olsen et al, ), as well as the sense of belonging and academic self‐efficacy (Freeman, Anderman, & Jensen, ). Veterans may find it especially difficult to connect with those who do not understand the military culture, have little knowledge of current overseas conflicts, or ask inappropriate questions (Dunwoody, Plane, Trescher & Rice, ). As one participant noted, “It’s hard to connect with someone who just does not understand.…”

Support for Anti‐Muslim Policies: The Role of Political Traits and Threat Perception

“…Those higher in SDO are low in empathy for those who suffer and oppose policies designed to attenuate the hierarchy such as welfare and affirmative action. Similar to authoritarianism, SDO predicts prejudice, opposition to immigration, and support for war (Dunwoody, Plane, Trescher, & Rice, ; McFarland, ; Pratto et al, ).…”

“…McFarland () and Cohrs and Ibler () found that threat perception mediates the relationship between authoritarianism and political judgments. Dunwoody et al () showed that threat‐related misperceptions partially mediated the relationship between authoritarianism, SDO, and support for war.…”

Empathy, Social Dominance Orientation, Mortality Salience, and Perceptions of a Criminal Defendant

“…Pratto, Sidanius, Stallworth, and Malle (1994) have defined social dominance orientation as "one's degree of preference for inequality among social groups" (p. 741). Past researchers have found respondents scoring high in social dominance orientation to endorse conservative and nationalistic political ideologies (Passini & Villano, 2013;Pratto et al, 1994), existing status hierarchies and stereotypes (Tausch & Hewstone, 2010), military actions (Cohrs, Moschner, Maes, & Kielmann, 2005;Dunwoody, Plane, Trescher, & Rice, 2014;Pratto et al, 1994), and various forms of prejudice (Bäckström & Björklund, 2007;Cohrs, Kämpfe-Hargrave, & Riemann, 2012;Gatto & Dambrun, 2012;Kteily, Sidanius, & Levin, 2011;Whitley, 1999). In Pratto et al's work, social dominance was negatively related to support for women's rights, social programs, and gay and lesbian rights.…”