Both-sidesism debunked? Study

Post Reply New Topic

A recent study published in Communications Psychology has found that anti-democratic tendencies in the United States are not evenly distributed across the political spectrum. According to the research, conservatives exhibit stronger anti-democratic attitudes than liberals, and this difference can be partially explained by psychological traits, specifically right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation.

Democracy in the United States has come under increasing strain in recent years, with events such as the January 6th Capitol attack fueling concerns about the state of the country’s political system. Many people tend to blame both liberals and conservatives for these developments, assuming that political extremism and anti-democratic tendencies are equally present on both sides. However, the research team wanted to investigate whether this assumption holds true.

“I believe that what motivated our interest in this topic comes mainly from an experience that Americans and Brazilians have unfortunately shared in politics recently: high political polarization and radicalization of the conservative-rightist side leading to violent, anti-democratic uprisings in federal capitals claiming that legitimate electoral results were fraudulent,” said study co-author Débora de Oliveira Santos, a Ph.D. candidate at the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul and former visiting researcher at the Social Justice Lab at the New York University.

“So, that caught our attention in understanding whether there was a relationship between ideology and anti-democratic attitudes. In this scenario, this paper was an opportunity to take an in-depth look at anti-democratic tendencies in American society, analyzing whether there were indeed ideological asymmetries in attitudes towards democracy, as well as to what extent these asymmetries could be related to psychological differences.”

Co-author John T. Jost, a professor and director of the Social Justice Lab at the New York University, added: “I have a longstanding interest in left-right ideological asymmetries in beliefs, opinions, and values, as well as underlying motivations and behavioral tendencies, and their implications for democratic functioning. This was the subject of my most recent book, Left & Right: The Psychological Significance of a Political Distinction.”

The study utilized data from the 2022 Health of Democracy Survey, which was conducted by the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at the University of Chicago. The survey was part of the AmeriSpeak Panel and included a nationally representative sample of 1,557 adults in the United States. The respondents were selected based on various demographic factors, such as age, race, ethnicity, education, and gender, to ensure the sample reflected the broader U.S. population.

Participants answered a wide range of questions designed to measure their political views, psychological traits, and attitudes toward democratic norms. Specifically, the researchers were interested in three key psychological factors: right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, and political system justification.

Right-wing authoritarianism refers to a combination of three attitudes: authoritarian submission (a tendency to submit to authorities seen as legitimate), authoritarian aggression (a tendency to be aggressive on behalf of those authorities), and conventionalism (a high degree of adherence to traditional social norms). Social dominance orientation measures the extent to which individuals endorse social hierarchies and inequality, while political system justification assesses the extent to which individuals support the current political system and view it as legitimate and fair.

To gauge participants’ democratic and anti-democratic tendencies, the survey included questions on seven key areas: support for democratic rights and guarantees, political equality in voting, freedom of speech, willingness to defect from democratic norms, tolerance of disliked groups, willingness to vote for anti-democratic candidates, and support for political violence.

The findings revealed significant differences between conservatives and liberals in their support for democratic principles. Conservatives, compared to liberals, were less supportive of political equality and legal rights and guarantees. In other words, conservatives were less likely to agree with statements such as “Everyone should be allowed to vote” and “The law should treat everyone the same, regardless of wealth or power.”

Conservatives were also more likely to endorse actions that defy democratic norms, such as voting for candidates who reject the legitimacy of elections and being more willing to justify political violence. In particular, they were more likely to agree with statements such as “The true American way of life is disappearing so fast that we may have to use force to save it” and “I support the use of violence to ensure my party’s candidate wins the 2024 presidential election” compared to liberals.

“Our results indicate that ideology plays a significant role in shaping people’s attitudes towards democracy,” de Oliveira Santos said. “Our analyses show that individuals who identify as conservative or Republican have less regard for democratic norms and principles.”

Importantly, these findings held even after controlling for the effects of political ideological and partisan extremism. “Contrary to common assumptions, anti-democratic attitudes are not attributed to ideological or partisan extremism but rather to right-leaning ideological and partisan identification,” de Oliveira Santos told PsyPost. “Therefore, the notion that liberals and conservatives are equally anti-democratic does not hold up in reality.”

“In the United States and several other countries, democracy is at risk, and the threat is largely coming from the political right, especially the far right.”

The researchers found that the differences between liberals and conservatives were partly explained by psychological traits. Right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation were both higher among conservatives and were linked to greater anti-democratic tendencies.

Interestingly, political system justification had the opposite effect. Conservatives who were high in political system justification showed more support for freedom of speech and legal rights and guarantees, and were less likely to endorse anti-democratic behaviors. This suggests that while conservatives tend to be more authoritarian and dominance-oriented, those who strongly believe in maintaining the current political system are less likely to support anti-democratic actions.

“While right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation increased anti-democratic tendencies among those with a conservative political orientation, political system justification seems to mitigate attitudes that go against democracy,” de Oliveira Santos explained. “This finding adds to other research, such as Langer et al. (2023) evidence on how voting for radical right parties is related to low system justification, and it may shed light on possible strategies and interventions for attitudes and behaviors that threaten democracy based on system justification.”

The study also examined attitudes toward the January 6, 2021, insurrection at the U.S. Capitol. Among Republicans, 27.5% expressed positive feelings toward the insurrectionists, compared to just 5.96% of Democrats. Both Republicans and Democrats who approved of the insurrectionists were higher in right-wing authoritarianism than their fellow partisans who disapproved. Among Democrats who approved of the insurrectionists, social dominance orientation was also significantly higher.

This suggests that individuals on both sides of the political spectrum who supported the insurrection shared authoritarian and dominance-oriented psychological traits, although these tendencies were much more prevalent among Republicans.

“It is also worth mentioning that both Republicans and Democrats who expressed favorable feelings towards the January 6, 2021, uprisings were more conservative and also had higher levels of right-wing authoritarianism than their co-partisans,” de Oliveira Santos told PsyPost. “This finding adds to what we found about conservative ideology being a relevant factor in lower support for democracy.”

But as with any study, there are some limitations to consider. First, the research is based on a cross-sectional survey, meaning it captures a snapshot of people’s beliefs and attitudes at a single point in time. As a result, the study cannot establish causal relationships.

“Since our analyses were based on a cross-sectional survey, there are inferential limitations that should be addressed in experimental or longitudinal designs,” de Oliveira Santos noted. “Additionally, our study focuses solely on the context of American politics, which has been marked by high political polarization and holds a two-party institutional arrangement. Although we believe that these results may be similar in other countries, such as Brazil, it would be pertinent to replicate the research elsewhere.”

“One thing we don’t know and perhaps won’t know for several years is how much of the ‘blame,’ so to speak, for anti-democratic behavior is attributable to President Trump himself, and how much is attributable to the conservative voters who support him.”

The researchers hope to expand this research by replicating it in different countries to see how political, cultural, and institutional contexts influence the relationship between ideology and anti-democratic attitudes. They also want to explore how ideology and psychological factors like authoritarianism shape support for explicitly anti-democratic regimes, such as dictatorships. The long-term goal is to use social science research to help preserve and protect liberal democracy in the United States and elsewhere.

“Many people in academia, journalism, and elsewhere are highly motivated to blame ‘both sides’ for the sorry state of democracy in the United States, but ‘both sides’ are very clearly not to blame, at least not equally so,” Jost added. “I have written about the problem of ‘both-sideology’ here.”

The study, “Liberal-conservative asymmetries in anti-democratic tendencies are partly explained by psychological differences in a nationally representative U.S. sample,” was authored by Débora de Oliveira Santos and John T. Jost.