Department of Psychology, Austin Peay Building, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996, USA.
Aggress Behav. 2010 Jul-Aug;36(4):238-50. doi: 10.1002/ab.20344.
Right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO) are associated with the approval of war as a political intervention [McFarland, 2005]. We examined whether the effects of RWA and SDO on war support are mediated by moral-disengagement mechanisms [i.e., responsibility reduction, moral justification, minimizing consequences, and dehumanizing-blaming victims; Bandura, 1999] and whether the ideologies use the mechanisms differently. Our data were consistent with the possibility that minimizing consequences (Study 1) and moral justification (Study 2) mediate the effects of RWA and SDO on approval of war. Both ideologies were positively associated with all moral-disengagement mechanism though more strongly so for RWA. Comparisons within ideologies suggest that RWA was most strongly associated with moral justification and SDO was most strongly associated with dehumanizing-blaming victims. We discuss implications and limitations.
右翼威权主义(RWA)和社会支配倾向(SDO)与支持战争作为一种政治干预有关[麦克法兰,2005]。我们研究了 RWA 和 SDO 对战争支持的影响是否通过道德脱离机制[即责任减轻、道德合理化、最小化后果和将受害者非人化-归咎于受害者;班杜拉,1999]来调解,以及这些意识形态是否以不同的方式使用这些机制。我们的数据与以下可能性一致:最小化后果(研究 1)和道德合理化(研究 2)调解了 RWA 和 SDO 对战争批准的影响。两种意识形态都与所有道德脱离机制呈正相关,但与 RWA 的相关性更强。意识形态内的比较表明,RWA 与道德合理化的关联最强,而 SDO 与将受害者非人化-归咎于受害者的关联最强。我们讨论了其意义和局限性。