advertisement
On MP3.com: MP3.com Staff Picks 2007
Find Articles in:
all
Business
Reference
Technology
News
Sports
Health
Autos
Arts
Home & Garden
advertisement

Content provided in partnership with
ProQuest

Personality and emotional correlates of right-wing authoritarianism

Social Behavior and Personality,  2000  by Bulter, J Corey

<< Page 1  Continued from page 3.  Previous | Next

According to Crandall (1994), The Anti-Fat Attitudes Scale can be divided into three subscales: dislike of fat (7 items), fear of fat (3 items), and willpower (3 items), the last of which reflects the extent to which subjects blame the obese for being overweight. Coefficient alpha for these subscales was .84,.83, and .68, respectively. Crandall found that dislike and willpower were correlated (r--.43, p

The Attitudes Toward Homosexuals Scale showed a very impressive coefficient alpha of .94 and the modified Ethnocentrism Scale yielded an alpha of .75, somewhat lower than the reliability of the original, longer Manitoba version (alpha = .90; Altemeyer, 1996).

Most Popular Articles in Health
Fuel your workout: exercisers who eat before they work out have more energy ...
Soothe a dry, itchy scalp: 5 easy expert solutions
Cocktails and calories: Beer, wine and liquor calories can really add up. ...
The sour truth about apple cider vinegar - evaluation of therapeutic use
The, six best supplements you've never heard of: these secret weapons can ...
More »
advertisement

An analysis of these measures indicated correlations between authoritarianism and openness to experience (r= --.32, p

An important issue in the search for the underlying personality traits associated with authoritarian attitudes is whether or not sected trait mechanism parallel the correlations we observe with authoritarianism. Conscientiousness, though related to RWA, did riot significantly correlate with attitudes toward homosexuality, ethnocentrism, or attitudes toward fat. Openness, in contrast, was related to both anti-gay attitudes (r---.27, p

It should also be noted that ethnocentrism anti-gay attitudes, and dislike of fat all correlated with each other in a cluster of intolerance (rs ranging from.33 to.43, all p

STUDY 2

METHOD

Participants. Seventy-six volunteers (36 men and 40 women) were recruited from psychology courses at a small, Midwestern, liberal arts college. The mean age was 24.29 (SD= - 7. 19). All of the subjects received extra-credit in their classes for participating.

Procedure. The testing conditions were similar to the procedures used in Study 1, except that the participants were given the full 240 item NEO PI-R personality inventory (Costa & McCrae, 1992b). They also responded to the RWA Scale (Altemeyer, 1996), and a measure of conservatism developed especially for this study This New Conservatism Scale was modeled after the original C-Scale (Wilson and Patterson, 1968), which measured political attitudes by asking subjects to respond either favorably or unfavorably to a variety of brief labels or "catch-phrases" representing a number of controversial issues. Because many of these verbal stimuli are seriously dated (e.g. beaMiks, fluoridation, jazz, pyjama parties), a new set of 40 balanced catch-phrases was developed (e.g. Rush Limbaugh, national health care, big business, gay rights, free condoms at school). These were rated on a scale of 0-2 and summed, with higher scores representing more conservative attitudes. Pre-testing indicated that the scale yielded a normal distribution of scores, showed good reliability (alpha=.83), and was able to differentiate clearly between selfidentified conservatives and liberals (M=50.1 vs. M=32.0, p

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A preliminary analysis of the data found that the RWA Scale, the Conservatism Scale, and the five major domains from the NEO PI-R all achieved a coefficient alpha reliability of .85 or greater, and that scores from the NEO and the RWA scale landed once again within published average ranges (Costa &McCrae, 1992a; Altemeyer, 1996). The mean for the Conservatism Scale for this sample was 39.5.