Cognitive ability and authoritarianism: Understanding support for Trump and Clinton

Choma, Becky L.; Hanoch, Yaniv

doi:10.1016/j.paid.2016.10.054

Cited by 134 publications

(109 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

101

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The problem with an economic explanation for support for Donald Trump is that these effects were dependent on political orientation in study 1 and nonexistent in the ANES data. This coincides with weak effects of economic dissatisfaction on intentions to vote for Trump found in other research (e.g., Mutz, 2018;Schaffner, MacWilliams, & Nteta, 2018 (al Gharbi, 2018;Mutz, 2018;Pettigrew, 2017;Schaffner et al, 2018), but also social dominance and authoritarianism (Choma & Hanoch, 2017;Mutz, 2018;Pettigrew, 2017 Choma and Hanoch (2017) found an association between SDO and support for Trump in a cross-sectional study pre-election with the same distribution, and a positive skew is the general finding in the literature on SDO (Ho et al, 2015;Jost & Thompson, 2000;Perry & Sibley, 2011;Pratto & Shih, 2000;Pratto, Sidanius, Stallworth & Malle, 1994). In contrast, when analyzing the post-election ANES survey, we did find a positive association be- Sidanius & Pratto, 1993).…”

Section: G Ener Al Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

“…This result cannot be attributed to the generally low levels of SDO in our sample. Our sample has no restriction of range in SDO, Choma and Hanoch () found an association between SDO and support for Trump in a cross‐sectional study pre‐election with the same distribution, and a positive skew is the general finding in the literature on SDO (Ho et al, ; Jost & Thompson, ; Perry & Sibley, ; Pratto & Shih, ; Pratto, Sidanius, Stallworth & Malle, ). In contrast, when analyzing the post‐election ANES survey, we did find a positive association between odds of voting for Donald Trump and SDO scores; however, the reverse causality of the ANES design makes interpretation difficult because one's vote was cast up to 2 months before SDO was measured.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 53%

“…Mturk samples allow for valid measurement of constructs, which are generally lacking among nationally representative samples (e.g., Strother, Piston, & Ogorzalek, 2017). Mturk offers diverse samples (Buhrmester, Kwang, & Gosling, 2011;Huff & Tingley, 2015), is a valid recruitment tool for political research (Clifford, Jewell, & Waggoner, 2015), and has been widely used for political research (e.g., Choma & Hanoch, 2017, Hayward, Hornsey, Tropp, & Barlow, 2017, including research on support for Donald Trump specifically (Blankenship, Savas, Frederick, & Stewart, 2018;Choma & Hanoch, 2017;. It provides far greater heterogeneity for testing political hypotheses regarding support for Donald Trump than student samples (e.g., Cohen, Solomon, & Kaplin, 2017) or other nonrepresentative sampling methods (Crowson & Brandes, 2017).…”

Section: G Ener Al Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

It’s security, stupid! Voters’ perceptions of immigrants as a security risk predicted support for Donald Trump in the 2016 US presidential election

Wright

Esses

2018

J Applied Social Pyschol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We analyzed two datasets to determine the predictive validity of four explanations of support for Donald Trump during the 2016 US presidential election: (a) security concerns regarding immigrants, (b) economic concerns regarding immigrants, (c) cultural concerns regarding immigrants, and (d) social dominance orientation. Results of a two‐phase study (N = 354) suggested that perceiving immigrants as a security concern was predictive of increased support for and greater odds of voting for Donald Trump three weeks later. Perceiving immigrants as an economic threat predicted odds of voting for Donald Trump, but only among liberals and there was no evidence of cultural concern or social dominance orientation (SDO) predicting support for Donald Trump or odds of voting for Trump. A follow‐up analysis of the cross‐sectional ANES survey corroborated that security concerns were an important correlate of voting for Trump, but also that SDO was correlated with having previously voted for Donald Trump. While our two‐phase study has the benefit of prediction, the cross‐sectional ANES data does not—“predictors” in these data were collected up to two months post‐election.

show abstract

Section: G Ener Al Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 53%

Section: G Ener Al Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

It’s security, stupid! Voters’ perceptions of immigrants as a security risk predicted support for Donald Trump in the 2016 US presidential election

Wright

Esses

2018

J Applied Social Pyschol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is precisely at this moment when simple and populist messages reach more people. This has been confirmed by several studies carried out by Choma andHanoch (2017), MacWilliams (2016) and Rahn and Oliver (2016) The case of Hillary Clinton is completely contrary despite she is a person that knows the establishment to perfection, with an unbeatable political experience, and the support of a party in power and a charismatic President, Barack Obama. Newspapers published photographs that depicted her in meetings surrounded by people and party militants: youngsters, adults, women, men.…”

Section: Conclusion and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 70%

Image of U.S. presidential candidates in Spanish digital ‘press’

Pedrosa¹,

Rojano²,

Maldonado³

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…(and) from delusions of fear." [177] For example, perceived fear of immigrants and diversity generates hope in authoritarian political candidates and the retrograde visions they espouse [178,179]; promises of a 'better world' are painted for certain sections of society (not all-of-society) by hearkening back to a romanticized time, an idyllic 'topia' where inconvenient truths such as greenhouse gases do not 'exist' and heavy sheet metal tailfins on automobiles make sense. Recent elections in the United States and Europe underscore the detrimental public health (and we would add, planetary health) consequences of political authoritarianism [180,181].…”

Section: Dangers Of Hope As Universal Nostrummentioning

confidence: 99%

Larger Than Life: Injecting Hope into the Planetary Health Paradigm

Prescott

Logan

2018

Challenges

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The term planetary health, popularized in the 1980s and 1990s, was born out of necessity; although the term was used by many diverse groups, it was consistently used to underscore that human health is coupled to the health of natural systems within the Earth's biosphere. The interrelated challenges of climate change, massive biodiversity losses, environmental degradation, grotesque socioeconomic inequalities, conflicts, and a crisis of non-communicable diseases are, mildly stated, daunting. Despite 'doomsday' scenarios, there is plenty of room for hope and optimism in planetary health. All over planet Earth, humans are making efforts at the macro, meso and micro scales to promote the health of civilization with the ingredients of hope-agency and pathway thinking; we propose that planetary health requires a greater commitment to understanding hope at the personal and collective levels. Prioritizing hope as an asset in planetary health necessitates deeper knowledge and discourse concerning the barriers to hope and the ways in which hope and the utopian impulse are corrupted; in particular, it requires examining the ways in which hope is leveraged by advantaged groups and political actors to maintain the status quo, or even promote retrograde visions completely at odds with planetary health. Viewing the Earth as a superorganism, with humans as the collective 'nervous system', may help with an understanding of the ways in which experience and emotions lead to behavioral responses that may, or may not be, in the best interest of planetary health. We argue that the success of planetary health solutions is predicated on a more sophisticated understanding of the psychology of prevention and intervention at all scales.

show abstract

Cognitive ability and authoritarianism: Understanding support for Trump and Clinton

Cited by 134 publications

References 24 publications

It’s security, stupid! Voters’ perceptions of immigrants as a security risk predicted support for Donald Trump in the 2016 US presidential election

It’s security, stupid! Voters’ perceptions of immigrants as a security risk predicted support for Donald Trump in the 2016 US presidential election

Image of U.S. presidential candidates in Spanish digital ‘press’

Larger Than Life: Injecting Hope into the Planetary Health Paradigm

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About