Trends in Authoritarianism

Abstract

This study reports on changes in the attitudes of authoritarianism and dogmatism among adolescents in West Germany and in the United States over a 33-year period. Surveys conducted in the United States in 1978 and in West Germany in 1979 are compared with surveys carried out in these countries in 1945 and in the 1960s. The survey instrument was a questionnaire composed of nine subscales, including items from the California F-Scale and from the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale. It focused on authoritarianism in relation to the state, the family, the school, and society in general. A significant decrease in authoritarianism scale scores over time was noted in each country. The changes were greater in West Germany than in the United States whereas German adolescents were far more authoritarian than their American contemporaries in 1945, American adolescents are somewhat more authoritarian than those in West Germany today, according to the scale scores. These findings also held when the analyses were repeated separately for each socioeconomic level.

Threat Appraisal and Authoritarianism in Context: Reactions to the European Union Enlargement in Border Regions

“…In this model, the explanation of differences in the thresholds for a classification as a threatening situation is linked to the question whether individuals have authoritarian dispositions or not. In contrast to Model A authoritarianism does not develop in the threatening context; it is seen as a more or less stable personality trait 5 (Adorno et al, 1950;Hopf, 1993;Lederer, 1982;Rippl et al, 2005;Stone, Lederer, & Christie, 1993) that becomes manifest in particular situations.…”

“…One should note, however, that already in the classical work of Adorno, Frenkel‐Brunswik, Levinson, and Sanford (), explications have combined the trait‐like psychological concept of authoritarianism with the analysis of cultural and social background variables, making it possible to explain differences in authoritarianism in different countries or cultural contexts. The studies of Kagitcibasi () or Lederer (Lederer, ; Lederer & Schmidt, ) are well‐known examples.…”

“…For this purpose, two general perspectives were differentiated: a situationist perspective that sees authoritarianism as a function of specific situations (Feldman, ; Oesterreich, ) and a second that sees authoritarianism as a stable disposition, existing independently of a specific situation (Adorno et al., ; Hopf, , ; Lederer, ). Neither of the two perspectives excludes the incorporation of context variables; however, their status is different.…”