New research provides evidence that people with left-wing authoritarian traits tend to use more egotistical and opportunistic social strategies to manage how others see them, while broad right-wing authoritarianism is mostly unrelated to these specific tactics. However, the study suggests that the similarity between the two political extremes depends heavily on the specific psychological traits driving a person’s authoritarianism. The findings were published in the journal Personality and Individual Differences.
Authoritarianism is a psychological tendency to value conformity over personal independence. It often involves a willingness to submit to authority figures and a desire to punish those who break social rules.
Historically, scientists measured authoritarianism primarily on the political right. Right-wing authoritarianism scales ask participants if they support submitting to traditional authorities in government and religion. They also measure a desire to destroy “sinful” or radical new ways of life and a preference for strict adherence to old-fashioned social norms.
More recent research has developed scales to measure left-wing authoritarianism. These questionnaires adapt the same core concepts to the opposite end of the political spectrum. They measure submission to left-wing authorities, such as environmental scientists or liberal leaders, and assess a desire to silence political opponents.
Previous research provides evidence that left-wing authoritarianism is a valid psychological phenomenon with real-world implications. In prior studies involving thousands of participants worldwide, scientists found that left-wing authoritarians share many traits with right-wing authoritarians. Both groups exhibit heightened dogmatism, a need for cognitive closure, and a strong belief in a dangerous world.
Other previous studies clarified the specific dimensions of left-wing authoritarianism. Scientists found it consists of anti-hierarchical aggression, which is a desire to overthrow the established order, and top-down censorship, which involves wanting to ban offensive views. It also involves anti-conventionalism, which is a strong rejection of traditional values.
While past research highlighted similarities in personality and cognitive styles, scientists wanted to know if these traits manifest similarly in everyday social strategies. Specifically, they focused on tactical self-presentation, which refers to the goal-directed behaviors people use to shape how others perceive them. People often manage their public image to gain influence or to protect themselves when they feel vulnerable.
These behaviors range from virtuous tactics, such as apologizing or acting as a moral role model, to opportunistic and egotistical tactics. Egotistical tactics include intimidating others, making excuses, or putting rivals down. A previous study indicated that left-wing authoritarianism was linked to a higher use of morally questionable, egotistical tactics.
The scientists conducted this new study to build upon that prior work. They sought to understand the extent to which left-wing and right-wing authoritarianism exhibit similar, distinct, or opposing approaches to how people present themselves in daily life.
“Authoritarianism involves influence and control, but there had been limited work on how people higher in left-wing authoritarianism and right-wing authoritarianism manage their public image to convey identities that are conducive to being influential. We were mainly interested in whether people higher in these two authoritarian orientations showed similar or dissimilar approaches,” said study author William P. Hart of the University of Alabama.
To explore these relationships, the researchers recruited 457 undergraduate students from a university in the southeastern United States. The participants were predominantly female and white, with an average age of about 18 years old. These individuals completed the study online at their convenience in exchange for course credit.
The participants filled out several standardized psychological questionnaires in a randomized order. To measure the two types of authoritarianism, the scientists used multiple established scales to capture both broad traits and specific components. Finally, the participants reported how frequently they engaged in 12 distinct self-presentation tactics.
The survey included 64 items asking about their past use of defensive strategies, such as lowering expectations with self-deprecating remarks. It also assessed assertive strategies, such as flattering others or exaggerating accomplishments.
When looking at the broad measures of left-wing authoritarianism, the scientists noticed a consistent pattern. Left-wing authoritarianism was associated with an increased use of egotistical and opportunistic tactics.
Specifically, people scoring higher in left-wing authoritarianism reported using more excuses, entitlement, self-enhancement, and intimidation. They also reported higher levels of self-handicapping, which involves creating obstacles to excuse potential failures, and acting needy to get help. These individuals also reported a reduced use of virtuous tactics, such as apologizing or setting a good example for others.
The broad measures of right-wing authoritarianism painted a different picture. Global right-wing authoritarianism was mostly unrelated to the use of these specific self-presentation tactics. One of the scales showed only a weak positive relationship with flattering others and acting helpless.
As a result, the overall profiles of left-wing and right-wing authoritarianism showed only weak similarities. This provides evidence that individuals elevated in these two types of authoritarianism tend to adopt distinct approaches to managing their social impressions.
The scientists then looked deeper into the specific components that make up right-wing authoritarianism. This detailed analysis complicated the initial conclusions and revealed a much more nuanced reality. “We expected that the conclusions might change somewhat when we examined components of these authoritarian constructs, but the extent was surprising,” Hart said.
Right-wing authoritarianism can be broken down into three main psychological tendencies: conventionalism, submission, and aggression. Conventionalism involves a strict adherence to traditional social norms and morals. The researchers found that the conventionalism component was strongly disconnected from the left-wing authoritarian profile, as it was primarily related to an enhanced use of virtuous tactics.
On the other hand, the submission and aggression components of right-wing authoritarianism showed a moderate similarity to the left-wing profile. People scoring high in these specific areas reported an increased use of intimidation, putting others down, and self-handicapping. They also exhibited a decreased tendency to apologize.
“Left-wing authoritarianism was related to enhanced use of ego-focused and opportunistic self-presentation tactics, but global right-wing authoritarianism was mostly unrelated to these tactics,” Hart explained. “That said, when we examined the facets of right-wing authoritarianism, some of them resembled left-wing authoritarianism but others diverged; so, really, the similarity between left-wing and right-wing authoritarianism on self-presentation really depends on which components are driving someone to be a right-wing authoritarian.”
The scientists noted that the effects observed in the study were in the small to moderate range. This is typical for personality research, but the researchers pointed out that even small effects can compound over time. This suggests that people higher in left-wing authoritarianism, at least, are highly strategic in managing their impressions to gain influence.
The researchers caution against drawing broad moral conclusions from these data. “This is not a study on moral character; the data do not say that one political group is better or more moral than another. This is a study on how people present the self in ways that could facilitate influence. Also, it is correlational in nature and based on a college sample, so we advise against generalizing the findings too much and drawing causal conclusions.”
Future research could investigate how people with these traits manage impressions during actual, real-world interactions rather than relying on self-reported surveys. The scientists are also interested in exploring whether these individuals adapt their interpersonal strategies over time to suit different audiences.
The study, “Profiling left- and right-wing authoritarianism and their facets on tactical self-presentation: Convergences, divergences, and the space in between,” was authored by William P. Hart, Danielle E. Wahlers, and Bella C. Roberts.
