Authoritarianism,Religiousness, and Conservatism: Is “Obedience to Authority” the Explanation for Their Clustering, Universality and Evolution?

  • Thomas J. BouchardJrEmail author
Part of the The Frontiers Collection book series (FRONTCOLL)


Authoritarianism, Religiousness and Conservatism are among the most studied social attitudes in modern psychology . Measures of the three attitudes consistently correlate between 0.50 and 0.70. These strong correlations suggest that they form a higher order factor that I call Traditionalism. I review evidence that supports the idea of such a higher order factor distinct from other attitude factors and comparable higher order personality traits. I propose that an underlying cause of Traditionalism is the disposition to obey authority and more broadly to respond positively to symbols of authority. Contemporary research shows that variance in this trait is due to genetic factors and not due to patterns of childrearing. There is suggestive evidence that this trait facilitates reproductive fitness , but the evidence is very indirect and appropriately designed studies are needed to answer the question. The predisposition to obey authority is consistent with constructs in two other major evolutionary theories: Haidt’s theory of the evolution of moral intuition and Simon’s theory of “docility.” I further argue that while obedience to religious authorities can be seen as a form of exploitation, and may well be in some cases, the disposition to obey authority probably evolved in the context of reciprocity .


Social Attitude Assortative Mating Social Dominance Orientation Moral Intuition High Order Factor 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Adorno T W, Frenkel-Brunswick E, Levinson D J, Sanford R N (1950) The authoritarian personality. Harper, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Alford J R, Funk C L, Hibbing J R (2005) Are Political Orientations Genetically Transmitted? American Political Science Review 99(2):153–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Altemeyer B (1996) The authoritarian specter. Harvard University Press, Cambridge MAGoogle Scholar
  4. Altemeyer B (1988) Enemies of freedom. Jossey-Bass, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  5. Altemeyer B (1981) Right-wing authoritarianism. University of Manitoba Press, WinnipegGoogle Scholar
  6. Atran S (2003) Genesis of suicide terrorism. Science 299:1534–1539PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Botwin M D, Buss D M, Shackelford T K (1997) Personality and Mate Preferences: Five Factors in Mate Selection and Marital Satisfaction. Journal of Personality 65:107–136.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bouchard T J Jr (2004) Genetic Influence on Human Psychological Traits: A Survey. Current Directions in Psychological Science 13(4):148–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bouchard T J Jr, Lykken D T, Tellegen A, McGue M (1996) Genes, drives, environment and experience: EPD theory – Revised. In: Benbow C P, Lubinski D (eds) Intellectual talent: Psychometrics and social issues. John Hopkins University Press, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  10. Bouchard T J Jr, Segal N L, Tellegen A, McGue M, Keyes M, Krueger R F (2004) Genetic influence on social attitudes: Another challenge to psychologists from behavior genetics. In: DeLilla L F (ed) Behavior genetic principles: Perspectives in Development, Personality and Psychopathology American Psychological Association, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  11. Bouchard T J Jr, Segal N L, Tellegen A, McGue M, Keyes M, Krueger R (2003) Personality and Individual Differences 34(6):959–969Google Scholar
  12. Boyer P (2001) Religion explained: The evolutionary origins of religious thought. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Bulbulia J A (2007) Evolution and religion. In: Dunbar R I M, Barrett L (eds) Oxford Handbook of evolutionary psychology. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  14. Cavalli-Sforza L L, Feldman M W (1981) Cultural transmission and evolution: A quantitative approach. Princeton University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. Cavalli-Sforza L L, Feldman M W, Chen K H, Dornbush S M (1982) Theory and observation in cultural transmission. Science 218:19–27PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Charlesworth W R (2003) Profiling terrorists: A taxonomy of evolutionary, developmental and situational causes of a terrorist act. Defense and Security Analysis 19:241–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Christie R, Geis F L (1970) (eds) Studies in Machiavellianism. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. Eaves L J, Martin N G, Heath A C, Hewitt J K, Neale M (1990) Personality and reproductive fitness. Behavior Genetics 20:563–568PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Eaves L J, Heath A C, Martin N G, Maes H H, Neale M C, Kendler K S, et al. (1999) Comparing the Biological and Cultural Inheritance of Personality and Social Attitudes in the Virginia 30,000 Study of Twins and Their Relatives. Twin Research 2:62–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Eckhardt W (1991) Authoritarianism. Political Psychology 12:97–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Eibl-Eibesfeldt I (1998) Us and the others: The familial roots of ethnocentrism. In: Eibl-Eibesfeldt I, Salter F K (eds) Indoctrinability, Ideology and Warfare: Evolutionary Perspectives. Berghahn Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. Feather N (1978) Family Resemblance in Conservatism: Are Daughters More Similar to Parents than Sons? Journal of Personality 46:260–278.Google Scholar
  23. Feng D, Baker L A (1994). Spouse Similarity in Attitudes, Personality, and Psychological Well-being. Behavior Genetics 24:357–364.Google Scholar
  24. Finn M V, Alexander R D (2007) Runaway social selection in human evolution. In: Gangestad S W, Simpson J A (eds) The evolution of mind: Fundamental questions and controversies. Guilford, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  25. Galton F (1865) Hereditary Talent and Character. Macmillan’s Magazine 12:157–166Google Scholar
  26. Greeley A M (1969) Religion in the year 2000. Sheed & Ward, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  27. Haidt J (2007) The new synthesis in moral psychology Science 316:998–1002PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Haidt J, Joseph C (2007) The moral mind: How 5 sets of innate moral intuitions guide the development of many culture-specific virtues, and perhaps even modules. In: Carruthers P, Laurence S, Stich S (eds) The innate mind: Foundations and the future, vol 3. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. Hawks J, Wang E T, Cochran G M, Harpending H, Moyzis R K (2007) Recent acceleration of human adaptive evolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 104(52):20753CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Henrich J, Boyd R (1998) The evolution of conformist transmission and between-group differences. Evolution and Human Behavior 19:215–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hout M, Greeley A, Wilde M J (2001) The demographic imperative in religious change in the United States. American Journal of Sociology 107:468–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Johnson W, Turkheimer E, Gottesman I I, Bouchard T J Jr (in press) Beyond Heritability: Twins as Tools of Behavioral Science. Current Directions in Psycholgical Science.Google Scholar
  33. Jost J T, Glaser J, Kruglanski A W, Sulloway F J (2003) Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin 129:339–375PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Keller B K, Whiston S C (2008) The Role of Parental Influences on Young Adolescents’ Career Development. Journal of Career Assessment 16(2):198–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kirk K M, Blomberg S P, Duffy D L, Heath A C, Owens I P F, Martin N G (2001). Natural Selection and Quantitative Genetics of Life History-traits in Western Women: A Twin Study. Evolution 55:423–435PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Koenig L B, Bouchard T J Jr (2006) Genetic and Environmental Influences on the Traditional Moral Values Triad – Authoritarianism, Conservatism and Religiousness – as Assessed by Quantitative Behavior Genetic Methods. In: McNamara P (ed) Where god and science meet: How brain and evolutionary studies alter our understanding of religion, vol 1: Evolution genes and the religious brain. Praeger, Westport CTGoogle Scholar
  37. Martin N G, Eaves L J, Heath A C, Jardine R, Feingold L M, Eysenck H J (1986) Transmission of social attitudes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 83(12):4364–4368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. McCourt K, Bouchard T J Jr, Lykken D T, Tellegen A, Keyes M (1999) Authoritarianism revisited: genetic and environmental influences examined in twins reared apart and together. Personality and Individual Differences 27:985–1014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Milgram S (1974) Obedience to authority. Harper & Row, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  40. Mulder M B (2007) On the utility, not the necessity, of tracking current fitness. In: Gangestad S, Simpson J A (eds) The evolution of mind: fundamental questions and controversies. The Guilford Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  41. Panksepp J, Panksepp J B (2000) The seven sins of evolutionary psychology. Evolution and Cognition 6:108–131Google Scholar
  42. Penke L, Denissen J J, Miller G F (2007) The evolutionary genetics of personality. European Journal of Personality 21:549–587CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pinker S (2006) The evolutionary psychology of religion. In: McNamara P (ed) Where god and science meet: How brain and evolutionary studies alter our understanding of religions, vol 1: Evolution genes and the religious brain. Praeger, Westport CTGoogle Scholar
  44. Pratto F, Sidanius J, Stallworth L M, Malle B F (1994) Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 67:741–763CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Rodgers J L, Hughes K A, Kohler H-P, Christensen K, Doughty D, Rowe D C, Miller W B (2001) Genetic influence helps explain individual differences in human fertility outcomes: evidence from recent behavioral molecular genetic studies. Current Directions in Psychological Science 10:184–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Rodgers J L, Rowe D C, Miller W B (2000) Genetic influence on human fertility and sexuality: Theoretical and empirical contributions from the biological and behavioral sciences. Kluwer, BostonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sarich V (1993) Letter to the editors of Scientific American – 26 May 1993. UnpublishedGoogle Scholar
  48. Saucier G (2000) Isms and the structure of social attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 78:366–385PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Saucier G, Skrzypinska K (2006) Spiritual but not religious? Two independent dispositions involved in religiousness and spirituality. Journal of Personality 74(5):1257–1292PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Scarr S (1981) Having the last word. In: Scarr S (ed) Race, social class, and individual differences in I. Q. Erlbaum, Hillsdale NJGoogle Scholar
  51. Simon H A (1990) A Mechanism for Social Selection and Successful Altruism. Science 250:1665–1668PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Stace W T (1960) Mysticism and philosophy. Lippincott, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  53. Sutton G C (1993) Do Men Grow to Resemble Their Wives? Journal of Biosocial Science 25:25–29.Google Scholar
  54. Tambs K, Sundet J M, Berg K (1993) Correlations between identical twins and their spouses suggest social homogamy for intelligence in Norway. Personality and Individual Differences 14:279–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Tellegen A, Waller N G (2008) Exploring personality through test construction: Development of the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire. In G J Boyle, G Mathews, D H Saklofske (Eds) Handbook of personality theory and testing: Vol II. Personality measurement and testing. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  56. Voland E, Voland R (1995) Parent/offspring conflict, the extended phenotype and the evolution of the conscience. Journal of Social and Evolutionary Systems 18:397–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Waller N G, Kojetin B A, Bouchard T J, Jr, Lykken D T, Tellegen A (1990) Genetic and Environmental Influences on Religious Interests, Attitudes, and Values: A Study of Twins Reared Apart and Together. Psychological Science 1:138–142.Google Scholar
  58. Wang E T, Kodama G, Baldi P, Moyzis R K (2007) Global Landscape of Recent Inferred Darwinian Selection for Homo sapiens. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 103:135–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Watson D, Klohen E C, Cassillas A, Simms E N, Haig J (2004) Match makers and deal breakers: Analyses of assortative mating in newlywed couples. Journal of Personality 72:1029–1068PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Wilson G (1973) (ed) The psychology of conservatism. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Psychology DepartmentUniversity of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA

Personalised recommendations