Abstract
Abstract. Civil liberties and rights such as freedom of expression, press, thought, religion, association, lifestyle, and equality against the law are being subjected to controversies in Western countries. We developed two hypotheses aimed at explaining divergent attitudes toward civil liberties among politically charged online communities on each side of the political spectrum. A study using a cross-sectional sample of social media users (N = 902) suggests that, as expected by our hypotheses, support for civil liberties tend to be higher among online groups of rightists – with economic conservatism being the only direct positive predictor and left-wing authoritarianism being a strong negative predictor. These results are discussed in relation to polarization over civil liberties and perceived power imbalances between online groups.
References
(1981). Right-wing authoritarianism. University of Manitoba Press.
(1998). The other “authoritarian personality”. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 30, pp. 47–91). Academic Press.
(2021). Data and materials for “Attitudes toward civil liberties and rights among politically charged online groups”. https://osf.io/mp48d
(2021). Spanish adaptation of the left-Wing Authoritarianism Index. Journal of Personality Assessment. 10.1080/00223891.2021.1981345
(2019). Neoliberal ideology and the justification of inequality in capitalist societies: Why social and economic dimensions of ideology are intertwined. Journal of Social Issues, 75(1), 49–88. 10.1111/josi.12310
(2018). The new authoritarianism. Trump, populism, and the tyranny of experts. Polity Press.
(2019). Who is the neoliberal? Exploring neoliberal beliefs across East and West. Journal of Social Issues, 75(1), 20–48. 10.1111/josi.12309
(2010). Formal institutions and subjective well-being: Revisiting the cross-country evidence. European Journal of Political Economy, 26(4), 419–430. 10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2010.03.001
(2017). Closing the gap: gender parity in political engagement on social media. Information, Communication & Society, 20(4), 587–603. 10.1080/1369118X.2016.1202302
(2017). McMaster debate with controversial professor Jordan Peterson disrupted by activists. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/mcmaster-debate-with-controversial-professor-jordan-peterson-disrupted-by-activists-1.4031843
. (2017). Hubo fuego, golpes y tensión Incidentes frente a la Catedral, tras la marcha por el Día de la Mujer. https://www.clarin.com/sociedad/incidentes-frente-catedral-marcha-dia-mujer_0_ByiWIMCql.html
(2018). Black lives matter and the civil rights movement: A comparative analysis of two social movements in the United States. Journal of Black Studies, 49(5), 448–480. 10.1177/0021934718764099
. (2017). Berkeley protests of Yiannopoulos caused $100,000 in damage. https://edition.cnn.com/2017/02/01/us/milo-yiannopoulos-berkeley/index.html
(2015). Are conservatives really more simple-minded than liberals? The domain specificity of complex thinking. Political Psychology, 37(6), 777–798. 10.1111/pops.12304
(2017). Finding the Loch Ness monster: Left-wing authoritarianism in the United States. Political Psychology, 39(5), 1049–1067. 10.1111/pops.12470
(2019). Do right-wing and left-wing authoritarianism predict election outcomes? Support for Obama and Trump across two United States presidential elections. Personality and Individual Differences, 138, 84–87. 10.1016/j.paid.2018.09.033
(2021). Is the myth of left-wing authoritarianism itself a myth? PsiArXiv. 10.31234/osf.io/frcks
(2021). Clarifying the structure and nature of left-wing authoritarianism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 10.1037/pspp0000341
(2020). Social and economic political ideology consistently operate as mutual suppressors: Implications for personality, social, and political psychology. Social Psychological and Personality Science. 10.1177%2F1948550620964679
(2012). The ideologically objectionable premise model: Predicting biased political judgments on the left and right. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(1), 138–151. 10.1016/j.jesp.2011.10.004
(2020). Ideological (a) symmetries in prejudice and intergroup bias. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 34, 40–45. 10.1016/j.cobeha.2019.11.007
(2009). Are all conservatives alike? A study of the psychological correlates of cultural and economic conservatism. The Journal of Psychology, 143(5), 449–463. 10.3200/JRL.143.5.449-463
(2011). Left-wing authoritarianism is not a myth, but a worrisome reality. Evidence from 13 Eastern European countries. Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 44(4), 299–308. 10.1016/j.postcomstud.2011.10.006
(2016). The aggression-submission-conventionalism scale: Testing a new three factor measure of authoritarianism. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 4(2), 571–600. 10.23668/psycharchives.1741
(2019). Boicot de feministas a un profesor universitario en Cataluña: "Me llamaron machista y transfóbico sin haber hablado. https://www.elmundo.es/espana/2019/12/21/5dfd51a0fdddff9e958b4660.html
(2013). The 12-item social and economic conservatism scale (SECS). PloS ONE, 8(12), e82131. 10.1371/journal.pone.0082131
(2020). Opening the can of worms: A comprehensive examination of authoritarianism. Personality and Individual Differences, 163, 110057. 10.1016/j.paid.2020.110057
(2017). The authoritarian left withdraws from politics: Ideological asymmetry in the relationship between authoritarianism and political engagement. The Journal of Politics, 79(3), 1010–1023. 10.1086/692126
(2013). Understanding the determinants of political ideology: Implications of structural complexity. Political Psychology, 35(3), 337–358. 10.1111/pops.12055
(2007). Civil liberties and human rights. Routledge-Cavendish
(2020). George Floyd unrest: Riots, fires, violence escalate in several major cities. https://www.foxnews.com/us/george-floyd-cities-brace-riots-national-guard-troops-mobilize
(2016). Internet freedom and social media effects: Democracy and citizen attitudes in Latin America. Online Information Review, 40(5), 712–38. 10.1108/OIR-11-2015-0351
(2020). Democracy in America? Partisanship, polarization, and the robustness of support for democracy in the United States. American Political Science Review, 114(2), 392–409. 10.1017/S000305542000005
(2018). Intergroup anxiety and political loss: The buffering effects of believing in the open marketplace of ideas and openness to diverse political discussions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 48(3), 150–164. 10.1111/jasp.12500
(2016). Why concepts creep to the left. Psychological Inquiry, 27(1), 40–45. 10.1080/1047840x.2016.1115713
(2019). Harm inflation: Making sense of concept creep. European Review of Social Psychology, 31(1), 254–286. 10.1080/10463283.2020.1796080
(2000). Development of the short form of the feminist perspectives scale. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 24(3), 254–256. 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2000.tb00207.x
(2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(2-3), 61–83. 10.1017/S0140525X0999152X
(2018). The psychological roots of anti-vaccination attitudes: A 24-nation investigation. Health Psychology, 37(4), 307–315. 10.1037/hea0000586
(2019) University rejects calls to fire Camille Paglia. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2019/04/17/university-arts-rejects-calls-fire-camille-paglia
(2013). In Imagining American democracy: The rhetoric of new conservative populism. PhD (Doctor of Philosophy) thesis. University of Iowa. 10.17077/etd.h3xcxu5m
(2001). Social traditionalism and economic conservatism: Two conservative political ideologies in the United States. The Journal of social psychology, 141(2), 233–243. 10.1080/00224540109600549
(2017). Ideological asymmetries and the essence of political psychology. Political Psychology, 38(2), 167–208. 10.1111/pops.12407
(2021). How affective polarization undermines support for democratic norms. Public Opinion Quarterly. 10.1093/poq/nfab029
(2019). Álvarez de Toledo, increpada al llegar a un acto constitucionalista en la UAB. https://www.lavanguardia.com/politica/20190411/461588654145/cayetana-alvarez-de-toledo-increpada-protestas-acto-constitucionalista-uab.html
(2018). How democracies die. Crown Publishing.
(2017). Beyond misinformation: Understanding and coping with the “post-truth” era. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 6(4), 353–369. 10.1016/j.jarmac.2017.07.008
(2021). Countering misinformation and fake news through inoculation and prebunking. European Review of Social Psychology, 32(2), 348–384. 10.1080/10463283.2021.1876983
(2020). Are civil liberties contagious? Analysis of determinants of de facto civil rights protection in post-socialist countries. Constitutional Political Economy. 10.1007/s10602-020-09313-7
(2014). V-Dem: A new way to measure democracy. Journal of Democracy, 25(3), 159–169. 10.1353/jod.2014.0040
(2020). How behavioural sciences can promote truth, autonomy and democratic discourse online. Nature Human Behaviour, 4(11), 1102–1109. 10.1038/s41562-020-0889-7
(2018). The coddling of the American mind: How good intentions and bad ideas are setting up a generation for failure. Penguin Press.
(2014). Do needs for security and certainty predict cultural and economic conservatism? A cross-national analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106(6), 1031–1051. 10.1037/a0036170
(2020). Right-wing Authoritarianism, Left-wing Authoritarianism, and pandemic-mitigation authoritarianism. Personality and Individual Differences, 167, 110251. 10.1016/j.paid.2020.110251
(2020). Platform values and democratic elections: How can the law regulate digital disinformation? Computer Law & Security Review, 36, 105373. 10.1016/j.clsr.2019.105373
(2020). Percepciones sobre medios de comunicación y desinformación: ideología y polarización en el sistema mediático español [Perceptions on media and disinformation: ideology and polarization in the Spanish media system]. Profesional de la información, 29(5), 964–974. 10.3145/epi.2020.sep.27
(2018). Polarization and the global crisis of democracy: Common patterns, dynamics, and pernicious consequences for democratic polities. American Behavioral Scientist, 62(1), 16–42. 10.1177/0002764218759576
(2021). Republicans, not democrats, are more likely to endorse anti-vaccine misinformation. American Politics Research, 49(5), 428–438. 10.1177/1532673X211022639
(2020). The political economy of liberal democracy. The Economic Journal, 130(627), 765–792. 10.1093/ej/ueaa004
. (2017). A campus argument goes viral. Now the college is under siege. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/16/us/evergreen-state-protests.html
(2016). Minding the happiness gap: Political institutions and perceived quality of life in transition. European Journal of Political Economy, 45, 129–148. 10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2016.07.008
(2020). The authoritarian-conservatism nexus. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 34, 148–154. 10.1016/j.cobeha.2020.03.003
(2002). Human rights: Concept and context. Broadview Press.
(2018). La deriva accionaria de la izquierda. Página Indómita.
(2019). Fighting misinformation on social media using crowdsourced judgments of news source quality. PNAS, 116(7), 2521–2526. 10.1073/pnas.1806781116
(2015). Social Networking Usage: 2005–2015. http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/10/08/2015/Social-Networking-Usage-2005-2015/
(2008). How does intergroup contact reduce prejudice? Meta-analytic tests of three mediators. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38(6), 922–934. 10.1002/ejsp.504
(2017). #Democracy: Social media use and democratic legitimacy in Central and Eastern Europe. Democratization, 24(4), 632–650. 10.1080/13510347.2016.1202929
(2018). Metacognitive failure as a feature of those holding radical beliefs. Current Biology, 28(24), 4014–4021. 10.1016/j.cub.2018.10.053
(2019). Going deeper: Social media use and the development of democratic attitudes in Latin America. Global Media and Communication, 15(1), 85–101. 10.1177/1742766518818871
(2021). Democratic disruption in the age of social media: Between marketized and structural conceptions of human rights law. European Journal of International Law, 32(1), 159–193. 10.1093/ejil/chab022
(1999). Development as freedom. Oxford University Press.
(2014). Different relational models underlie prototypical left and right positions on social issues. European Journal of Social Psychology, 45(2), 204–217. 10.1002/ejsp.2074
(2015). That’s not funny: Instrument validation of the concern for political correctness scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 80, 32–40. 10.1016/j.paid.2015.02.012
(2007). Using multivariate statistics. Pearson.
(2015). The New Intolerance of Student Activism. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/the-new-intolerance-of-student-activism-at-yale/414810/
(2016). More polarized but more independent: Political party identification and ideological self-categorization among U.S. adults, college students, and late adolescents, 1970-2015. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42(10), 1364–1383. 10.1177/0146167216660058
(2020). The paranoid style in American politics revisited: An ideological asymmetry in conspiratorial thinking. Political Psychology. 10.1111/pops.12681
(2006). The presence of left-wing authoritarianism in Western Europe and its relationship with conservative ideology. Political Psychology, 27(5), 769–793. 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2006.00532.x
(2017). Extreme political beliefs predict dogmatic intolerance. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8(3), 292–300. 10.1177/1948550616671403
(2007). Testing the limits of tolerance: How intergroup anxiety amplifies negative and offensive responses to out-group-initiated contact. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33(12), 1686–1699. 10.1177/0146167207307485
(2010). The revolution will be networked: The influence of social networking sites on political attitudes and behavior. Social Science Computer Review, 28(1), 75–92. 10.1177/0894439309335162
(2008). Conflict, fusion, or coexistence? The complexity of contemporary American conservatism. Political Behavior, 30, 199–221. 10.1007/s11109-007-9047-4
