Re-examining the EU Referendum vote: right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation as indirect trait-level motivation

IF 2 3区 社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Domantas Undzenas, Kris Dunn, V. Spaiser
{"title":"Re-examining the EU Referendum vote: right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation as indirect trait-level motivation","authors":"Domantas Undzenas, Kris Dunn, V. Spaiser","doi":"10.1080/17457289.2021.1986052","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Various economic and social characteristics have been used to explain individual vote choice in the 2016 British EU Referendum. Recently, researchers have considered the role various psychological orientations have played in this vote choice. Here, we are interested in two in particular: right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO); constructs that are often used to predict a host of political attitudes and behaviors, particularly those where group identities are a central issue. Those high in RWA prefer group uniformity and are willing to use coercion to enforce this preference. Those high in SDO prefer group-based, hierarchical social and political systems over more egalitarian systems. These orientations are therefore likely to have played a role in people’s vote choice in this referendum. Using data from the 2014–2019 British Election Study internet panel we show that RWA and SDO powerfully influence anti-immigrant attitudes and pro-sovereignty attitudes; attitudes strongly associated with individual vote choice. Our findings suggest that the EU Referendum effectively rallied people’s prejudices against foreign and domestic outsiders to pull the United Kingdom from the European Union.","PeriodicalId":46791,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Elections Public Opinion and Parties","volume":"8 1","pages":"938 - 959"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Elections Public Opinion and Parties","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17457289.2021.1986052","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

ABSTRACT Various economic and social characteristics have been used to explain individual vote choice in the 2016 British EU Referendum. Recently, researchers have considered the role various psychological orientations have played in this vote choice. Here, we are interested in two in particular: right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO); constructs that are often used to predict a host of political attitudes and behaviors, particularly those where group identities are a central issue. Those high in RWA prefer group uniformity and are willing to use coercion to enforce this preference. Those high in SDO prefer group-based, hierarchical social and political systems over more egalitarian systems. These orientations are therefore likely to have played a role in people’s vote choice in this referendum. Using data from the 2014–2019 British Election Study internet panel we show that RWA and SDO powerfully influence anti-immigrant attitudes and pro-sovereignty attitudes; attitudes strongly associated with individual vote choice. Our findings suggest that the EU Referendum effectively rallied people’s prejudices against foreign and domestic outsiders to pull the United Kingdom from the European Union.
重新审视欧盟公投:右翼威权主义和社会支配取向作为间接特质层面动机
各种经济和社会特征被用来解释2016年英国脱欧公投中的个人投票选择。最近,研究人员考虑了各种心理取向在这种投票选择中所起的作用。在这里,我们对两个特别感兴趣:右翼威权主义(RWA)和社会支配取向(SDO);通常用来预测一系列政治态度和行为的构念,尤其是那些以群体身份为中心问题的构念。RWA高的人更喜欢组一致性,并愿意使用强制来强制执行这种偏好。高SDO的人更喜欢以群体为基础的、等级分明的社会和政治体系,而不是更平等的体系。因此,这些倾向很可能在这次全民公决中对人们的投票选择起了作用。利用2014-2019年英国选举研究互联网小组的数据,我们发现RWA和SDO有力地影响了反移民态度和亲主权态度;态度与个人投票选择密切相关。我们的研究结果表明,欧盟公投有效地凝聚了人们对国内外局外人的偏见,使英国退出欧盟。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
5.60%
发文量
21
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信