Political Orientation and Ideological Inconsistencies: (Dis)comfort with Value Tradeoffs
Purchase on Springer.com
$39.95 / €34.95 / £29.95*
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.
People are often inconsistent in the way they apply their values to their political beliefs (e.g., citing the value of life in opposing capital punishment while simultaneously supporting abortion rights). How do people confront such inconsistencies? Liberals were more likely to say that issues that could draw on several competing values were complex issues that required value tradeoffs, whereas conservatives were more likely to deny the comparability of the issues. We argue that this difference is rooted in the distinct ways that liberals and conservatives represent political issues. Additional evidence suggested that conservatives’ higher need for closure leads them to represent issues in terms of salient, accessible values. Although this may lead conservatives’ attitudes to be more situationally malleable under some circumstances, such shifts do serve to protect an absolutist approach to one’s moral values and help conservatives to deny the comparability of potentially inconsistent positions.
- Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
- Brehm, S. S., & Brehm, J. W. (1981). Psychological reactance: A theory of freedom and control. New York: Academic Press.
- Cavazza, N., & Butera, F. (2008). Bending without breaking: Examining the role of attitudinal ambivalence in resisting persuasive communication. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 1–15. CrossRef
- Cohen, G. L. (2003). Party over policy: The dominating impact of group influence on political beliefs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 808–822. CrossRef
- Converse, P. E. (1964). The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In D. E. Apter (Ed.), Ideology and discontent (pp. 206–261). London: Free Press of Glencoe.
- Ferguson, M. (2008). On the subliminal evaluative conditioning of goals. Unpublished manuscript, Cornell University.
- Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
- Golec, A. (2002). Cognitive skills as predictor of attitudes toward political conflict: A study of Polish politicians. Political Psychology, 23, 731–757. CrossRef
- Golec de Zavala, A., & Van Bergh, A. (2007). Need for cognitive closure and conservative political beliefs: Differential mediation by personal worldviews. Political Psychology, 28, 587–608. CrossRef
- Greenberg, J., & Jonas, E. (2003). Psychological motives and political orientation—The left, the right, and the rigid: Comment on Jost et al. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 376–382. CrossRef
- Gross, S. R., & Ellsworth, P. C. (2003). Second thoughts: Americans’ views on the death penalty at the turn of the century. In S. P. Garvey (Ed.), Beyond repair? America’s death penalty (pp. 7–57). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
- Haidt, J., & Graham, J. (2007). When morality opposes justice: Conservatives have moral intuitions that liberals may not recognize. Social Justice Research, 20, 98–116. CrossRef
- Hovland, C., Janis, I., & Kelley, H. (1953). Communication and persuasion. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
- Jost, J. T. (2006). The end of the end of ideology. American Psychologist, 61, 651–670. CrossRef
- Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. J. (2003a). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 339–375. CrossRef
- Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. J. (2003b). Exceptions that prove the rule—Using a theory of motivated social cognition to account for ideological incongruities and political anomalies: Reply to Greenberg and Jonas (2003). Psychological Bulletin, 129, 383–393. CrossRef
- Jost, J. T., Kruglanski, A. W., & Simon, L. (1999). Effects of epistemic motivation on conservatism, intolerance, and other system justifying attitudes. In L. Thompson, D. M. Messick, & J. M. Levine (Eds.), Shared cognition in organizations: The management of knowledge (pp. 91–116). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
- Kemmelmeier, M. (1997). Need for closure and political orientation among German university students. Journal of Social Psychology, 137, 787–789. CrossRef
- Kossowska, M., & van Hiel, A. (2003). The relationship between need for closure and conservative beliefs in Western and Eastern Europe. Political Psychology, 24, 501–518. CrossRef
- Kruglanski, A. W. (1990). Lay epistemic theory in social-cognitive psychology. Psychological Inquiry, 1, 181–197. CrossRef
- Kruglanski, A. W., Pierro, A., Mannetti, L., & De Grada, E. (2006). Groups as epistemic providers: Need for closure and the unfolding of group-centrism. Psychological Review, 113, 84–100. CrossRef
- Kruglanski, A. W., & Webster, D. M. (1996). Motivated closing of the mind: “Seizing” and “freezing”. Psychological Review, 103, 263–283. CrossRef
- Lakoff, G. (2004). Don’t think of an elephant: Know your values and frame the debate—The essential guide for progressives. White River Jct., VT: Chelsea Green.
- Lakoff, G. (2006). Thinking points: Communicating our American values and vision. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.
- McGuire, W. J. (1964). Inducing resistance to persuasion: Some contemporary approaches. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 191–229). New York: Academic Press. CrossRef
- Sears, D. (1993). Symbolic politics: A socio-psychological theory. In S. Iyengar & W. J. McGuire (Eds.), Explorations in political psychology (pp. 113–149). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
- Skitka, L. J., & Mullen, E. (2002). Understanding judgments of fairness in a real-world political context: A test of the Value Protection Model of justice reasoning. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1419–1429. CrossRef
- Skitka, L. J., Mullen, E., Griffin, T., Hutchinson, S., & Chamberlin, B. (2002). Dispositions, scripts, or motivated correction? Understanding ideological differences in explanations for social problems. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 470–487. CrossRef
- Tetlock, P. E. (1986). A value pluralism model of ideological reasoning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 819–827. CrossRef
- Tetlock, P. E., Peterson, R. S., & Lerner, J. S. (1996). Revising the value pluralism model: Incorporating social context and context postulates. In C. Selingman, J. M. Olson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The psychology of values: The Ontario symposium (Vol. 9, pp. 25–49). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
- Webster, D. M., & Kruglanski, W. (1994). Individual differences in Need for Cognitive Closure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 1049–1062. CrossRef
- Zaller, J. R. (1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Political Orientation and Ideological Inconsistencies: (Dis)comfort with Value Tradeoffs
Social Justice Research
Volume 22, Issue 2-3 , pp 181-205
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer US
- Additional Links
- Ideological inconsistency
- Political ideology
- Value tradeoffs
- Need for closure
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Department of Psychology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA
- 2. Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of Colorado at Boulder, Boulder, CO, USA
- 3. Department of Psychology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA
- 4. Department of Psychology and Social Behavior, University of California–Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA