Subcomponents of Right-Wing Authoritarianism Differentially Predict Attitudes Toward Obeying Authorities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous theory and research has suggested that right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) is a unitary construct related to attitudes regarding obedience to authority. Recently, scholars have suggested that RWA is multidimensional. To adjudicate these competing notions, we test whether the associations between RWA components and moral attitudes regarding obedience differ depending on the ideology of the authority. Across three studies and an integrative data analysis, we found that the RWA component capturing obedience to and respect for authorities (i.e., submission) related to judgments that it is moral to obey all authorities, and perhaps also nonauthorities, regardless of the targets’ political ideologies. In contrast, the RWA component capturing socially conservative beliefs (i.e., traditionalism) related to judgments that it is moral to obey conservative authorities and immoral to obey liberal authorities. These results suggest that RWA is not a unitary construct and that its components differentially relate to moral judgments regarding obedience to authorities.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".