Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Fundamental Social Motives Mediate the Associations that Dangerous and Competitive Social Worldviews Have with Ideological Attitudes

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Evolutionary Psychological Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of the present study was to examine the connections that dangerous and competitive social worldviews had with the ideological attitudes of Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO). More specifically, the focus was on the possibility that the associations that these social worldviews had with ideological attitudes may be mediated by the fundamental social motives in a sample of undergraduates (N = 485; 79% female). The results revealed partial support for the hypotheses such that the association that the competitive social worldview had with RWA was mediated by the status seeking motive, the affiliation motive, and the kin care motive, whereas the association that the competitive social worldview had with SDO was mediated only by the status seeking motive. In contrast, the fundamental social motives did not mediate the association that the dangerous social worldview had with RWA. Discussion focuses on the implications of these results for understanding the role that motivation may play in the connections between social worldviews and ideological attitudes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Although there were no specific predictions concerning the affiliation motive, the mate seeking motive, the mate retention motive, or the kin care motive, these fundamental social motives were included as potential mediators for exploratory purposes. This was important because it was possible that one or more of these motives (e.g., affiliation, kin care) may have either been activated by a particular social worldview or may have been associated with the development of a particular ideological attitude. The results concerning the self-protection motive, the disease avoidance motive, and the status seeking motive were highly similar regardless of whether the other fundamental social motives were included in the analyses.

  2. The results of analyses that included data for the 83 participants who were excluded due to careless or inattentive responding were highly consistent with those reported in later sections.

  3. An additional analysis was conducted that employed the subscales of the Authoritarianism–Conservatism–Traditionalism Scale instead of the RWA composite score. The purpose of this analysis was to provide additional insight into the unexpected finding that the competitive social worldview was associated with RWA and that this association was mediated by the status seeking motive, the affiliation motive, and the kin care motive. However, the results of this analysis showed extremely similar patterns for each subscale of the Authoritarianism–Conservatism–Traditionalism Scale. More specifically, the competitive social worldview had indirect associations with the authoritarianism subscale through the status seeking motive (B = 0.05, SE = 0.02, 95% CI (0.01, 0.12), z = 2.23, p = 0.03), the affiliation motive (B = 0.04, SE = 0.02, 95% CI (0.01, 0.09), z = 1.96, p = 0.05), and the kin care motive (B = − 0.15, SE = 0.04, 95% CI (− 0.24, − 0.06), z = − 3.35, p < 0.001). Similarly, the competitive social worldview had indirect associations with the conservatism subscale through the status seeking motive (B = 0.09, SE = 0.03, 95% CI (0.04, 0.18), z = 2.75, p = 0.006), the affiliation motive (B = 0.07, SE = 0.03, 95% CI (0.02, 0.14), z = 2.26, p = 0.02), and the kin care motive (B = − 0.18, SE = 0.06, 95% CI (− 0.30, − 0.07), z = − 3.11, p = 0.002). Finally, the competitive social worldview had indirect associations with the traditionalism subscale through the status seeking motive (B = 0.08, SE = 0.03, 95% CI (0.03, 0.16), z = 2.45, p = 0.01), the affiliation motive (B = 0.09, SE = 0.04, 95% CI (0.03, 0.18), z = 2.50, p = 0.01), and the kin care motive (B = − 0.22, SE = 0.06, 95% CI (− 0.35, − 0.11), z = − 3.63, p < 0.001). Taken together, this pattern suggests that the mediational associations that emerged for the RWA composite score were not driven by a particular subscale of the Authoritarianism–Conservatism–Traditionalism Scale.

References

  • Ackerman, J. M., Becker, D. V., Mortensen, C. R., Sasaki, T., Neuberg, S. L., & Kenrick, D. T. (2009). A pox on the mind: Disjunction of attention and memory in the processing of physical disfigurement. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 478–485.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Altemeyer, B. (1981). Right-wing authoritarianism. Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Altemeyer, B. (1988). Enemies of freedom: Understanding right-wing authoritarianism. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Altemeyer, B. (1998). The other “authoritarian personality”. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 30, pp. 47–92). San Diego: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, U. S., Perea, E. F., Becker, D. V., Ackerman, J. M., Shapiro, J. R., Neuberg, S. L., & Kenrick, D. T. (2010). I only have eyes for you: ovulation redirects attention (but not memory) to attractive men. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 804–808.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Baer, D., & McEachron, D. L. (1982). A review of selected sociobiological principles: Application to hominid evolution: I. The development of group social structure. Journal of Social and Biological Structures, 5, 69–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barkow, J. H., Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (1995). The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beall, A. T., & Tracy, J. L. (2017). Emotivational psychology: How distinct emotions facilitate fundamental motives. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 11, e12303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker, D. V., Anderson, U. S., Neuberg, S. L., Maner, J. K., Shapiro, J. R., Ackerman, J. M., Schaller, M., & Kenrick, D. T. (2010). More memory bang for the attentional buck: Self-protection goals enhance encoding efficiency for potentially threatening males. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 1, 182–189.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Bugental, D. B. (2000). Acquisition of the algorithms of social life: a domain-based approach. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 187–219.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Confer, J. C., Easton, J. A., Fleischman, D. S., Goetz, C. D., Lewis, D. M., Perilloux, C., & Buss, D. M. (2010). Evolutionary psychology: controversies, questions, prospects, and limitations. American Psychologist, 65, 110–126.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cosmides, L. (1989). The logic of social exchange: Has natural selection shaped how humans reason? Studies with the Wason selection task. Cognition, 31, 187–276.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cottrell, C. A., & Neuberg, S. L. (2005). Different emotional reactions to different groups: a sociofunctional threat-based approach to “prejudice”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 770–789.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Crowson, H. M. (2009). Right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation as mediators of worldview beliefs on attitudes related to the war on terror. Social Psychology, 40, 93–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curran, P. G. (2016). Methods for the detection of carelessly invalid responses in survey data. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 66, 4–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Andrade, R. (1992). Schemas and motivation. In R. D’Andrade & C. Strauss (Eds.), Human motives and cultural models (pp. 23–44). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Dallago, F., Mirisola, A., & Roccato, M. (2012). Predicting right-wing authoritarianism via personality and dangerous worldview beliefs: direct, indirect, and interactive effects. Journal of Social Psychology, 152, 112–127.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Duckitt, J. (2001). A dual process cognitive-motivational theory of ideology and prejudice. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 33, pp. 41–113). San Diego: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duckitt, J., & Fisher, K. (2003). The impact of social threat on worldview and ideological attitudes. Political Psychology, 24, 199–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duckitt, J., & Sibley, C. G. (2009). A dual-process motivational model of ideology, politics, and prejudice. Psychological Inquiry, 20, 98–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duckitt, J., Wagner, C., du Plessis, I., & Birum, I. (2002). The psychological bases of ideology and prejudice. Testing a dual process model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 75–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Duckitt, J., Bizumic, B., Krauss, S. W., & Heled, E. (2010). A tripartite approach to right-wing authoritarianism: the authoritarianism–conservatism–traditionalism model. Political Psychology, 31, 685–715.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fincher, C. L., & Thornhill, R. (2012). Parasite-stress promotes in-group assortative sociality: the cases of strong family ties and heightened religiosity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 35, 61–79.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Griskevicius, V., & Kenrick, D. T. (2013). Fundamental motives: how evolutionary needs influence consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23, 372–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J. M., Sundie, J. M., Cialdini, R. B., Miller, G. F., & Kenrick, D. T. (2007). Blatant benevolence and conspicuous consumption: When romantic motives elicit strategic costly signals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 85–102.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Haselton, M. G., & Buss, D. M. (2000). Error management theory: a new perspective on biases in cross-sex mind reading. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 81–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Haselton, M. G., & Nettle, D. (2006). The paranoid optimist: an integrative evolutionary model of cognitive biases. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 47–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: a regression-based approach. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ho, A. K., Sidanius, J., Kteily, N., Sheehy-Skeffington, J., Pratto, F., Henkel, K. E., Foels, R., & Stewart, A. L. (2015). The nature of social dominance orientation: theorizing and measuring preferences for intergroup inequality using the new SDO7 scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109, 1003–1028.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, J. L., Curran, P. G., Keeney, J., Poposki, E. M., & DeShon, R. P. (2012). Detecting and deterring insufficient effort responding to surveys. Journal of Business and Psychology, 27, 99–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inbar, Y., Pizarro, D., Iyer, R., & Haidt, J. (2012). Disgust sensitivity, political conservatism, and voting. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3, 537–544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jost, J. T., & Amodio, D. M. (2012). Political ideology as motivated social cognition: behavioral and neuroscientific evidence. Motivation and Emotion, 36, 55–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. J. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 339–375.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jugert, P., & Duckitt, J. (2009). A motivational model of authoritarianism: integrating personal and situational determinants. Political Psychology, 30, 693–719.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kenrick, D. T., Li, N. P., & Butner, J. (2003). Dynamical evolutionary psychology: individual decision rules and emergent social norms. Psychological Review, 110, 3–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kenrick, D. T., Griskevicius, V., Neuberg, S. L., & Schaller, M. (2010a). Renovating the pyramid of needs: contemporary extensions built upon ancient foundations. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5, 292–314.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Kenrick, D. T., Neuberg, S. L., Griskevicius, V., Becker, D. V., & Schaller, M. (2010b). Goal-driven cognition and functional behavior: the fundamental-motives framework. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19, 63–67.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Leone, L., Desimoni, M., & Chirumbolo, A. (2012). HEXACO, social worldviews and sociopolitical attitudes: a mediation analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 53, 995–1001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maesschalck, D., Jouan-Rimbaud, D. L., & Massart, D. L. (2000). The Mahalanobis distance. Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems, 50, 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maner, J. K., Kenrick, D. T., Becker, D. V., Robertson, T. E., Hofer, B., Neuberg, S. L., Delton, A. W., Butner, J., & Schaller, M. (2005). Functional projection: how fundamental social motives can bias interpersonal perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 63–78.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Maner, J. K., Gailliot, M. T., Rouby, D. A., & Miller, S. L. (2007). Can’t take my eyes off you: attentional adhesion to mates and rivals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 389–401.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Maner, J. K., Miller, S. L., Moss, J. H., Leo, J. L., & Plant, E. A. (2012). Motivated social categorization: fundamental motives enhance people's sensitivity to basic social categories. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103, 70–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Marjanovic, Z., Holden, R., Struthers, W., Cribbie, R., & Greenglass, E. (2015). The inter-item standard deviation (ISD): An index that discriminates between conscientious and random responders. Personality and Individual Differences, 84, 79–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50, 370–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maxwell, S. E., & Cole, D. A. (2007). Bias in cross-sectional analyses of longitudinal mediation. Psychological Methods, 12, 23–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Meade, A. W., & Craig, S. B. (2012). Identifying careless responses in survey data. Psychological Methods, 17, 437–455.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, S. L., Maner, J. K., & Becker, D. V. (2010). Self-protective biases in group categorization: threat cues shape the psychological boundary between “us” and “them”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99, 62–77.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mortensen, C. R., Becker, D. V., Ackerman, J. M., Neuberg, S. L., & Kenrick, D. T. (2010). Infection breeds reticence: the effects of disease salience on self-perceptions of personality and behavioral avoidance tendencies. Psychological Science, 21, 440–447.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Neel, R., Kenrick, D. T., White, A. E., & Neuberg, S. L. (2016). Individual differences in fundamental social motives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110, 887–907.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nesse, R. M. (2005). Natural selection and the regulation of defenses: a signal detection analysis of the smoke detector principle. Evolution and Human Behavior, 26, 88–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neuberg, S. L., Kenrick, D. T., & Schaller, M. (2011). Human threat management systems: self-protection and disease avoidance. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 35, 1042–1051.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Öhman, A., & Mineka, S. (2001). Fears, phobias, and preparedness. Toward an evolved module of fear and fear learning. Psychological Review, 108, 483–522.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Perry, R., Sibley, C. G., & Duckitt, J. (2013a). A comparison of broad-bandwidth and frequency-specific measures of competitive and dangerous worldviews. Personality and Individual Differences, 54, 284–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perry, R., Sibley, C. G., & Duckitt, J. (2013b). Dangerous and competitive worldviews: a meta-analysis of their associations with social dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism. Journal of Research in Personality, 47, 116–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L., & Malle, B. (1994). Social dominance orientation: a personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 741–763.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richard, F. D., Bond, C. F., & Stokes-Zoota, J. J. (2003). One hundred years of social psychology quantitatively described. Review of General Psychology, 7, 331–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross, M. (1993). The culture of conflict. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rozin, P., & Royzman, E. B. (2001). Negativity bias, negativity dominance, and contagion. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 296–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schaller, M. (2006). Parasites, behavioral defenses, and the social psychological mechanisms through which cultures are evoked. Psychological Inquiry, 17, 96–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schaller, M., & Park, J. H. (2011). The behavioral immune system (and why it matters). Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20, 99–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schaller, M., Park, J. H., & Mueller, A. (2003). Fear of the dark: interactive effects of beliefs about danger and ambient darkness on ethnic stereotypes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 637–649.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schönbrodt, F. D., & Perugini, M. (2013). At what sample size do correlations stabilize? Journal of Research in Personality, 47, 609–612.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shook, N. J., Ford, C. G., & Boggs, S. T. (2017). Dangerous worldview: a mediator of the relation between disgust sensitivity and social conservatism. Personality and Individual Differences, 119, 252–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sibley, C. G., & Duckitt, J. (2009). Big-five personality, social worldviews, and ideological attitudes: further tests of a dual process cognitive-motivational model. Journal of Social Psychology, 149, 545–561.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sibley, C. G., Wilson, M. S., & Duckitt, J. (2007). Effects of dangerous and competitive worldviews on right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation over a five-month period. Political Psychology, 28, 357–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, C. (1992). Models and motives. In R. D’Andrade & C. Strauss (Eds.), Human motives and cultural models (pp. 1–20). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Terrizzi, J. A., Shook, N. J., & McDaniel, M. A. (2013). The behavioral immune system and social conservatism: a meta-analysis. Evolution and Human Behavior, 34, 99–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thornhill, R., & Fincher, C. L. (2014). The parasite-stress theory of sociality, the behavioral immune system, and human social and cognitive uniqueness. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 8, 257–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tybur, J. M., Merriman, L. A., Hooper, A. E. C., McDonald, M. M., & Navarrete, C. D. (2010). Extending the behavioral immune system to political psychology: are political conservatism and disgust sensitivity really related? Evolutionary Psychology, 8, 599–616.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • van Leeuwen, F., & Park, J. H. (2009). Perceptions of social dangers, moral foundations, and political orientation. Personality and Individual Differences, 47, 169–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, C., & Federico, C. M. (2007). Interpersonal attachment and patterns of ideological belief. Political Psychology, 28, 389–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeigler-Hill, V., & Hobbs, K. A. (2017). The darker aspects of motivation: pathological personality traits and the fundamental social motives. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 36, 87–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeigler-Hill, V., Vrabel, J. K., McCabe, G. A., Cosby, C. A., Traeder, C. K., Hobbs, K. A., & Southard, A. C. (in press). Narcissism and the pursuit of status. Journal of Personality.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Oakland University, 654 Pioneer Drive, Rochester, MI, 48309, USA

    Virgil Zeigler-Hill

Authors
  1. Virgil Zeigler-Hill
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Virgil Zeigler-Hill.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zeigler-Hill, V. Fundamental Social Motives Mediate the Associations that Dangerous and Competitive Social Worldviews Have with Ideological Attitudes. Evolutionary Psychological Science 5, 29–41 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40806-018-0164-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40806-018-0164-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation