Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Politics
posted by janrinok on Thursday December 07 2017, @01:05AM   Printer-friendly
from the and-a-polite-discussion-ensued... dept.

Recently published in Journal of Social and Political Psychology by Thomas F. Pettigrew seeks to understand the psychological profile of Trump supporters:

The Trump movement is not singular within the United States (the Know Nothing movement in the 1850s, the Wallace movement in the 1960s, and the more recent Tea Party Movement). Moreover, other democracies have seen similar movements (e.g., Austria's Freedom Party, Belgium's Vlaams Blok, France's National Front, Germany's Alternative for Germany Party (AfD), and Britain's U.K. Independence Party (UKIP).

In virtually all these cases, the tinder especially involved male nativists and populists who were less educated than the general population. But this core was joined by other types of voters as well. Five highly interrelated characteristics stand out that are central to a social psychological analysis – authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, outgroup prejudice, the absence of intergroup contact and relative deprivation.No one factor describes Trump's supporters. But an array of factors – many of them reflecting five major social psychological phenomena can help to account for this extraordinary political event: authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, prejudice, relative deprivation, and intergroup contact.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday December 16 2017, @05:51PM

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday December 16 2017, @05:51PM (#610746) Journal

    The growing trend started around mid 2010 had a stagnation in 2016 (consistent with an election year) then continued at a rate no higher than before.

    I missed this post earlier, but I'll note that a big reason why such stalls are "consistent" with election years is because of the uncertainty that comes from the possibility of a bad choice getting elected president. You have to consider the dynamics not merely assert that shit happens. If Clinton were a perceived as a much better choice for president, then these figures wouldn't continue to climb once Trump was elected. Manufacturers would instead be looking at ways to minimize the impact, such as reducing hiring.

    While here may be something, it is also possible there's nothing. Many other factors can trigger the same. Attributing this to the Trump-factor is, at best, a hypothesis which requires validation or a simple assertion without support in reality at the worst

    Hence, the data which was supplied. That was a validation.