Social Dominance and Authoritarianism in Political Psychology

Social dominance and authoritarianism are two interrelated constructs that help explain why individuals and groups uphold hierarchical social structures and cling to rigid norms. Social dominance orientation reflects a general preference for inequality among social groups, whereas authoritarianism captures a proclivity for obedience to authority, conformity to group norms and aggression towards those deemed outsiders. Political psychology has long recognised that these dispositions emerge from evolutionary, personality and situational factors, shaping attitudes on immigration, intergroup conflict, environmental policy and public health. Recent work has refined our understanding of how cooperative and conformist motivations underpin these ideologies, how left-wing and right-wing forms of authoritarianism diverge in their social targets, and how crises such as a pandemic can intensify hierarchical or authoritarian responses. Together, this research highlights the global significance of these mindsets in sustaining prejudice, undermining democratic values and influencing policy preferences, while also pointing towards interventions that promote egalitarian cooperation and resilience to fear-based appeals.

Research from Nature Portfolio

Recent studies have combined large-scale surveys with incentivised behavioural tasks to reveal the distinct evolutionary roots of dominance and authoritarian attitudes. One investigation demonstrated that cooperative behaviour predicts lower social dominance orientation and support for economically egalitarian policies, whereas conformity-driven information use aligns with higher authoritarianism and socially conservative views. These findings challenge simplistic interpretations of punitive or rule-following tendencies and underscore the nuanced interplay between ancestral social preferences and contemporary ideological divides. Parallel research employing representative samples has identified that support for totalitarian governance, belief in malevolent conspiracies and anti-hierarchical aggression jointly forecast hostility towards minority groups. This work elucidates how conspiracy beliefs and a drive to overturn the social order fuel both traditional and novel forms of prejudice, emphasizing the need to address the cognitive and motivational underpinnings of authoritarian hostility.

Social Dominance and Authoritarianism in Political Psychology publication trend

The graph below shows the total number of articles in social dominance and authoritarianism in political psychology across all publications each year (not limited to Nature Index journals).

Technical terms

Social dominance orientation (SDO): A personality trait reflecting the extent to which an individual endorses group-based hierarchies and inequality among social groups.

Right-wing authoritarianism (RWA): A motivational syndrome characterised by authoritarian submission to established authorities, conventionalism and aggression towards those who defy traditional social norms.

Left-wing authoritarianism (LWA): An analogous set of attitudes to RWA but oriented towards left-wing goals, marked by submission to progressive authorities and intolerance of dissenting views within a leftist framework.

References

1. Cooperative and conformist behavioural preferences predict the dual dimensions of political ideology. Scientific Reports (2023).
2. Antisemitism is predicted by anti-hierarchical aggression, totalitarianism, and belief in malevolent global conspiracies. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications (2023).
3. Examining relations between left-wing authoritarianism and environmentalism. Journal of Environmental Psychology (2024).
4. Dual Evolutionary Foundations of Political Ideology Predict Divergent Responses to COVID-19. British Journal of Political Science (2023).
5. Right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation predict rejection of science and scientists. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations (2021).