Group-Based Dominance and Authoritarian Aggression Predict Support for Donald Trump in the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election

Abstract

In three convenience samples (combined N = 3,755) and one nationally representative survey (N = 1,500), we investigated whether and how right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO) were associated with support for Donald Trump during the 2016 U.S. presidential election. In all samples, facets of RWA and SDO predicted support for Trump (compared to other Republican, Democratic, and Libertarian candidates), even after adjusting for demographic factors and religious affiliation. In comparison with supporters of other Republican candidates, Trump supporters were consistently higher in group-based dominance and authoritarian aggression (but not submission or conventionalism). These results highlight the real-world significance of psychological theories and constructs and establish that Trump voters were uniquely driven by the desire to dominate out-group members in an aggressive manner.

Neoliberal Ideology and the Justification of Inequality in Capitalist Societies: Why Social and Economic Dimensions of Ideology Are Intertwined

“…Liberals are generally more open, tolerant, curious, creative, deliberative, and intellectually minded, whereas conservatives tend to be more orderly, conscientious, moralistic, intuitive, closed‐minded, and duty bound. It is easy to assimilate these results with longstanding observations that people who gravitate toward politically conservative, rightist opinions are generally more dogmatic, rigid, authoritarian, and prejudiced than people who gravitate toward more liberal, leftist opinions (Adorno et al., ; Altemeyer, ; Brown, ; Duckitt, ; Jost et al., ; Napier & Jost, ; Sidanius & Pratto, ; Womick, Rothmund, Azevedo, King, & Jost, ). However, the notion that political ideology is totally irrelevant to most people—as Kinder and Kalmoe () and others have argued—is hard to square with the fact that measures of ideology are systematically related to many aspects of people's lives, including their psychological characteristics.…”

Egalitarianism: psychological and socio-ecological foundations

“…Decades of research conducted in multiple countries and cultures demonstrates that anti-egalitarianism measured in this way predicts support for ideologies, policies and behaviours that enhance versus attenuate disparities between social groups, including racism, sexism, fiscal conservatism, and harsh treatment of the poor, criminals, and immigrants [2,23,24]. SDO has emerged as a key explanatory variable in understanding even the most recent efforts to uphold intergroup hierarchy, such as through far-right nationalism and persecution of Muslims [25][26][27][28][29] (see also [30]), suggesting that such efforts are fueled by equality concerns that are ultimately grounded in dilemmas of resource distribution. This orientation is not only general, but enduring, and influential: new work using advanced longitudinal methods has demonstrated the stability of both sub-dimensions of SDO, as well as its ability to predict other social attitudes over time, already in adolescence [31] (see also [32,33]).…”

The social‐psychological bases of far‐right support in Europe and the United States

“…We conclude that Trump's rhetoric particularly appeals to those with higher levels of RWA, SDO, and prejudice. Indeed, by defending traditional American values, emphasizing concerns about national security, and portraying immigrants as a threat to the dominant economic position of the United States, he strongly appeals to the motives of those with right‐wing authoritarian and socially dominant attitudes (Womick, Rothmund, Azevedo, King, & Jost, ). Moreover, his prejudicial views and statements also attract a fair share of voters that have negative views on immigration, immigrants, and other out‐groups alike (Kellner, ).…”