ISSN 2079-6617 (Print)
ISSN 2309-9828 (Online)
Ru | En
Russian Psychological Society
The Faculty of Psychology. Lomonosov Moscow State University.
Main RSS Search

MainArticlesVolumes

Grigoryev D.S. (2017). Development of a short version of the dual process model scales: right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, dangerous and competitive worldviews. National Psychological Journal. 4, 30-44.

Abstract

Objective. The article describes a short version of the dual process model scales by J. Duckitt that allow elaborating on an integrated exploratory approach for the assessment of authoritarianism.

Background. This area of research is not widespread in Russia in contrast to foreign social psychology. Unfortunately, there are only a few studies in Russia that advance our understanding of the indicated problems, and these few studies likely put more questions than give answers. It can be partly explained by the lack of appropriate available, reliable and valid measures in Russian. Dual process model for the study of authoritarianism offers the scales designed to measure: (1) right-wing authoritarianism that reflects the motivation and attitudes to maintain and preservation of the social cohesion, order, stability, and collective security; (2) social dominance orientation that reflects the motivation and attitudes to maintain and preservation of the dominance and superiority; (3) dangerous worldview that reflects views of the social world as the dangerous and threatening; and (4) competitive worldview that reflects views of the social world as the competitive and ferocious.

Design. The data for the analysis were collected in the survey of 241 participants, mostly residents of Moscow (Central Federal District), Russia, and Ulyanovsk (Volga Federal District), Russia. Using confirmatory factor analysis the four measurement models containing the different number of dimensions of the short version of the dual process model scales were tested. Also, cross-validation was performed (N = 576).

Results. The tested measurement models had acceptable reliability and validity indices. However, the best fit was shown by the model with multidimensional structure in which all the subfactors were as separate constructs.

Conclusion. The short version of scales was successfully compiled, the measures can be considered a reliable and valid measure to study of authoritarianism in Russia.

Received: 02/11/2017
Accepted: 09/23/2017
Pages: 30-44
DOI: 10.11621/npj.2017.0403

Sections: Experimental Psychology;

PDF: /pdf/npj-no28-2017/npj_no28_2017_030-044.pdf

Keywords: right-wing authoritarianism; social dominance orientation; dangerous worldview; competitive worldview; attitude; social worldviews;

Available Online 01.01.2018

References:

Aichholzer, J., & Zeglovits, E. (2015) Balancierte Kurzskala autoritärer Einstellungen (B-RWA-6). Zusammenstellung sozialwissenschaftlicher Items und Skalen. Retrieved from: http://zis.gesis.org/skala/Aichholzer-Zeglovits-Balancierte-Kurzskala-autoritärer-Einstellungen-(B-RWA-6) (accessed: 20.09.2016).

Altemeyer, B. (1981) Right-Wing Authoritarianism. Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada: University of Manitoba Press, 352.

Altemeyer, B. (1996) The Authoritarian Specter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 374.

Beierlein, C., Asbrock, F., Kauff, M., & Schmidt, P. (2014). Die Kurzskala Autoritarismus (KSA-3): Ein ökonomisches Messinstrument zur Erfassung dreier Subdimensionen autoritärer Einstellungen. Zusammenstellung sozialwissenschaftlicher Items und Skalen. Retrieved from: http://zis.gesis.org/skala/Beierlein-Asbrock-Kauff-Schmidt-Kurzskala-Autoritarismus-(KSA-3) (accessed: 20.09.2016).

Chirumbolo, A., Leone, L., & Desimoni, M. (2016) The interpersonal roots of politics: Social value orientation, socio-political attitudes and prejudice. Personality and Individual Differences, 91, 144–153. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2015.12.001

Dhont, K., Hodson, G., & Leite, A.C. (2016). Common Ideological Roots of Speciesism and Generalized Ethnic Prejudice: The Social Dominance Human- Animal Relations Model (SD-HARM). European Journal of Personality, 30(6), 507–522. doi: 10.1002/per.2069

Duckitt, J. (2001). A dual-process cognitive-motivational theory of ideology and prejudice. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.). Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (V. 33, pp. 41–113). New York, NY: Academic Press, 325. doi: 10.1016/S0065-2601(01)80004-6

Duckitt, J., & Bizumic, B. (2013) Multidimensionality of Right-Wing Authoritarian Attitudes: Authoritarianism-Conservatism-Traditionalism. Political Psychology, 34(6), 841–862. doi: 10.1111/pops.12022

Duckitt, J., & Sibley, C.G. (2007) Right wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation and the dimensions of generalized prejudice. European Journal of Personality, 21(2), 113–130. doi: 10.1002/per.614

Duckitt, J., & Sibley, C.G. (2010) Personality, Ideology, Prejudice, and Politics: A Dual-Process Motivational Model. Journal of Personality, 78(6), 1861–1894. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2010.00672.x

Duckitt, J., & Sibley, C.G. (2016) The dual process motivational model of prejudice. In C.G. Sibley, F.K. Barlow (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of the Psychology of Prejudice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 686.

Duckitt, J., Wagner, C., du Plessis, I., & Birum, I. (2002) The psychological bases of ideology and prejudice: Testing a dual process model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(1), 75–93. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.83.1.75

Feather, N.T., & McKee, I.R. (2012) Values, Right-Wing Authoritarianism, Social Dominance Orientation, and Ambivalent Attitudes Toward Women. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42(10), 2479–2504. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2012.00950.x

Federico, C.M., Hunt, C.V., & Ergun, D. (2009) Political Expertise, Social Worldviews, and Ideology: Translating “Competitive Jungles” and “Dangerous Worlds” into Ideological Reality. Social Justice Research, 22(2–3), 259–279. doi: 10.1007/s11211-009-0097-0

Fornell, C., & Lacker, D. (1981) Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. 10.2307/3151312

Funke, F. (2005) The Dimensionality of Right-Wing Authoritarianism: Lessons from the Dilemma between Theory and Measurement. Political Psychology, 26(2), 195–218. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2005.00415.x

Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., & Anderson, R. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis, (7th Ed.). NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Upper Saddle River, 816.

Hancock, G.R., & Mueller, R.O. (2001) Rethinking construct reliability within latent variable systems. In R. Cudeck, S. du Toit, & D. Sörbom (Eds.), Structural Equation Modeling: Present and Future — A Festschrift in honor of Karl Jöreskog (pp. 195–216). Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International, Inc, 598.

Ho, A.K., Sidanius, J., Kteily, N., Sheehy-Skeffington, J., Pratto, F., Henkel, K. E., … & Stewart, A.L. (2015) The nature of social dominance orientation: Theorizing and measuring preferences for intergroup inequality using the new SDO₇ scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109(6), 1003–1028. doi: 10.1037/pspi0000033

Ho, A.K., Sidanius, J., Pratto, F., Levin, S., Thomsen, L., Kteily, N., & Sheehy-Skeffington, J. (2012) Social Dominance Orientation: Revisiting the Structure and Function of a Variable Predicting Social and Political Attitudes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(5), 583–606. doi: 10.1177/0146167211432765

Hodson, G., & Dhont, K. (2015) The person-based nature of prejudice: Individual difference predictors of intergroup negativity. European Review of Social Psychology, 26(1), 1–42. doi: 10.1080/10463283.2015.1070018

Hodson, G., MacInnis, C.C., & Busseri, M.A. (2017) Bowing and kicking: Rediscovering the fundamental link between generalized authoritarianism and generalized prejudice. Personality and Individual Differences, 104, 243–251. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2016.08.018

Huddy, L. (2004) Contrasting Theoretical Approaches to Intergroup Relations. Political Psychology, 25(6), 947–967. doi: 10.1111/j.1467- 9221.2004.00404.x

Kline, R.B. (2011). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Kuşdil, M.E., & Akoğlu, S.Ç. (2014) Relationships Among Social Dominance Orientation, Social Axioms, and Values. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 42(8), 1395–1407. doi: 10.2224/sbp.2014.42.8.1395

Maholtra, N.K., & Dash, S. (2010) Marketing Research: An Applied Orientation, (6th Ed.). London, UK: Pearson Education. 1000.

Mavor, K.I., Louis, W.R., & Sibley, C.G. (2010) A bias-corrected exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of right-wing authoritarianism: Support for a three-factor structure. Personality and Individual Differences, 48(1), 28–33. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2009.08.006

McFarland, S.G., Ageyev, V.S., & Abalakina-Paap, M. (1992) Authoritarianism in the former Soviet Union. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 1004–1010. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.63.6.1004

McFarland, S.G., Ageyev, V.S., & Djintcharadze, N. (1996) Russian authoritarianism two years after communism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 210–217. doi: 10.1177/0146167296222010

Nunnally, J., & Bernstein, I. (1994). Psychometric Theory (3ed). NY: McGraw-Hill. 774.

Perry, R., & Sibley, C.G. (2013) A Dual-Process Motivational Model of Social and Economic Policy Attitudes. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 13(1), 262–285. doi: 10.1111/asap.12019

Perry, R., Sibley, C.G., & Duckitt, J. (2013) Dangerous and competitive worldviews: A meta-analysis of their associations with Social Dominance Orientation and Right-Wing Authoritarianism. Journal of Research in Personality, 47(1), 116–127. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2012.10.004

Pettigrew, T. F. (2016) In Pursuit of Three Theories: Authoritarianism, Relative Deprivation, and Intergroup Contact. Annual Review of Psychology, 67(1), 1–21. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-122414-033327

Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L.M., & Malle, B.F. (1994) Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(4), 741–763. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.67.4.741

Radkiewicz, P. (2016) Another look at the duality of the dual-process motivational model. On the role of axiological and moral origins of right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation. Personality and Individual Differences, 99, 106–112. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2016.04.080

Ross, M.H. (1993) The Culture of Conflict: Interpretations and Interests in Comparative Perspective. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 264.

Satherley, N., & Sibley, C.G. (2016) A Dual Process Model of attitudes toward immigration: Predicting intergroup and international relations with China. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 53, 72–82. doi: 10.1016/j.ijintrel.2016.05.008

Satorra, A., & Bentler, P.M. (2001) A scaled difference chi-square test statistic for moment structure analysis. Psychometrika, 66(4), 507–514. doi: 10.1007/BF02296192

Sibley, C.G., & Duckitt, J. (2013) The dual process model of ideology and prejudice: a longitudinal test during a global recession. The Journal of Social Psychology, 153(4), 448–466. doi: 10.1080/00224545.2012.757544

van de Schoot, R., Lugtig, P., & Hox, J. (2012) A checklist for testing measurement invariance. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 9, 486–492. doi: 10.1080/17405629.2012.686740

van Hiel, A., Cornelis, I., Roets, A., & De Clercq, B. (2007) A comparison of various authoritarianism scales in Belgian Flanders. European Journal of Personality, 21(2), 149–168. doi: 10.1002/per.617

Wolf, E.J., Harrington, K.M., Clark, S.L., & Miller, M.W. (2013). Sample Size Requirements for Structural Equation Models: An Evaluation of Power, Bias, and Solution Propriety. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 73(6), 913–934. doi: 10.1177/0013164413495237

For citing this article:

Grigoryev D.S. (2017). Development of a short version of the dual process model scales: right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, dangerous and competitive worldviews. National Psychological Journal. 4, 30-44.

About Editorial Board Volumes Authors For Authors Indexing Contacts
CC BY-NC

National Psychological Journal, 2006 - 2020