Right-wing authoritarianism and perceptions that minoritized groups pose a threat: The moderating roles of individual- and country-level religiosity and marginalization
Fahima Farkhari, Julian Scharbert, Lara Kroencke, Christin Schwarzer, Jonas F. Koch, Maarten H. W. van Zalk, Bernd Schlipphak, Mitja D. Back
{"title":"Right-wing authoritarianism and perceptions that minoritized groups pose a threat: The moderating roles of individual- and country-level religiosity and marginalization","authors":"Fahima Farkhari, Julian Scharbert, Lara Kroencke, Christin Schwarzer, Jonas F. Koch, Maarten H. W. van Zalk, Bernd Schlipphak, Mitja D. Back","doi":"10.1111/bjso.12830","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) refers to an adherence to conventional values and authorities with the power to penalize groups that are perceived to challenge the cohesion of ingroup norms. Correspondingly, RWA has repeatedly been linked to negative perceptions of minoritized groups, such as refugees or religious minorities. To investigate whether and how sociocultural factors add to and moderate how RWA influences perceptions that minoritized groups pose a threat (i.e. threat perceptions), we examined (a) the value of RWA, religiosity and perceived societal marginalization in predicting these threat perceptions across countries, (b) potential moderating effects of individual- and country-level religiosity and marginalization on the RWA-threat link and (c) the robustness of cross-sectional findings when daily threat perceptions were assessed longitudinally. We used cross-sectional survey data from Germany <i>N</i> = 1896; Study (1) and Europe <i>N</i> = 3227; Study (2) and global cross-sectional and longitudinal daily diary data <i>N</i> = 3154 individuals; <i>N</i> >52,447 assessments; <i>N</i> = 41 countries; Study (3). Our studies point to the significance of contextual conditions and the generalizability of cross-sectional findings to day-to-day assessments of threat perceptions.</p>","PeriodicalId":48304,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Social Psychology","volume":"64 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bjso.12830","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Social Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjso.12830","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) refers to an adherence to conventional values and authorities with the power to penalize groups that are perceived to challenge the cohesion of ingroup norms. Correspondingly, RWA has repeatedly been linked to negative perceptions of minoritized groups, such as refugees or religious minorities. To investigate whether and how sociocultural factors add to and moderate how RWA influences perceptions that minoritized groups pose a threat (i.e. threat perceptions), we examined (a) the value of RWA, religiosity and perceived societal marginalization in predicting these threat perceptions across countries, (b) potential moderating effects of individual- and country-level religiosity and marginalization on the RWA-threat link and (c) the robustness of cross-sectional findings when daily threat perceptions were assessed longitudinally. We used cross-sectional survey data from Germany N = 1896; Study (1) and Europe N = 3227; Study (2) and global cross-sectional and longitudinal daily diary data N = 3154 individuals; N >52,447 assessments; N = 41 countries; Study (3). Our studies point to the significance of contextual conditions and the generalizability of cross-sectional findings to day-to-day assessments of threat perceptions.
期刊介绍:
The British Journal of Social Psychology publishes work from scholars based in all parts of the world, and manuscripts that present data on a wide range of populations inside and outside the UK. It publishes original papers in all areas of social psychology including: • social cognition • attitudes • group processes • social influence • intergroup relations • self and identity • nonverbal communication • social psychological aspects of personality, affect and emotion • language and discourse Submissions addressing these topics from a variety of approaches and methods, both quantitative and qualitative are welcomed. We publish papers of the following kinds: • empirical papers that address theoretical issues; • theoretical papers, including analyses of existing social psychological theories and presentations of theoretical innovations, extensions, or integrations; • review papers that provide an evaluation of work within a given area of social psychology and that present proposals for further research in that area; • methodological papers concerning issues that are particularly relevant to a wide range of social psychologists; • an invited agenda article as the first article in the first part of every volume. The editorial team aims to handle papers as efficiently as possible. In 2016, papers were triaged within less than a week, and the average turnaround time from receipt of the manuscript to first decision sent back to the authors was 47 days.