Research Indicates Several Personality Traits Produce Trump Bases Loyalty
Psychological, sociological, and political science research shows that a constellation of personality characteristics leads people to prefer authoritarian political leaders; a result that may explain the strong loyalty of Trump voters.
Factors like:
- unstable and increasing cost of living
- groundless, seemingly whimsical initiation of war
- and race-based, anti-minority policies
may remain helpful rational issues but much of the administration’s rhetoric resonates with the deeply ingrained anxieties and personal issues of many of these voters.
The appearance of a political movement supporting Trump-led policies is not unique to the United States. Others include the Know Nothing movement in the 1850s, the Wallace movement in the 1960s, and the more recent Tea Party Movement. Moreover, such movements have arisen in other democracies, including Austria (the Freedom Party), Belgium (Vlaams Blok), France (the National Front), Germany (the Alternative for Germany Party) and Britain’s U.K. Independence Party (UKIP). Key to the success of each of these was the participation of male nativists and populists who were less educated than the general population. However, the size of these groups reflect that they have attracted other types of voters as well. Personality characteristics which others not in the core group appear to share (and which contribute to a social psychological analysis) include authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, outgroup prejudice, the absence of intergroup contact, and relative deprivation.
Recent research has supported the view that fear of societal change – loss of social position by some individuals and groups – along with concern for personal financial security and safety, disposes people to favor the kind of authoritarian, “strong-man” government leadership now holding sway in the United States. A recent article by Thomas F. Pettigrew, a psychology professor at UC, Santa Cruz, reports several traits characterize the syndrome: deference to authority, aggression toward outgroups, a rigidly hierarchical view of the world, and resistance to new experience. Authoritarianism is typically triggered by threat and fear, and authoritarians tend to view the world as a very dangerous and threatening place.
A personality configuration referred to as “social dominance orientation” (SDO) often leads a person to favor authoritarian rule by a “strong man” leader. SDO is closely related to authoritarianism but clearly separable. It features an individual’s preference for a rigid societal hierarchy of racial and other groups, and domination over lower-status groups; and represents a predisposition toward anti-egalitarianism within and between groups. (Researchers customarily administer personality profile questionnaires to research subjects to identify characteristics that they are investigating.) Individuals who score high in SDO on such questionnaires are typically dominant, driven, tough-minded, disagreeable, and relatively uncaring seekers of power. They believe in a “dog-eat-dog” world, and they report being motivated by self-interest and self-indulgence.
One recognized psychological phenomenon, called “cognitive dissonance” or the holding by one individual of mutually contradictory views on a factual issue, is apparent in discussions with many supporters of the administration, scholars have found. Research into Trump-allied voters in the United States by a professor at Western Sydney University, Cindy Harmon-Jones, finds that many voters who support Trump despite his convictions for criminal acts, his being found liable for sexual abuse of women, and other unacceptable conduct, are uncomfortable with this dissonance. Such persons, Prof. Harmon-Jones reports, often seek to resolve the dissonance by denying the facts. But in her study, these denials were often framed in ways suggesting that voters holding them were aware, perhaps at a subconscious level, of the contradictions and of their rational inconsistency. This awareness also suggests, she reported, that they do not really believe in their denials. Such awareness could also, if responded to with care and avoidance of judgement, offer an opening for such persons to reconsider these positions.
The foregoing research appears to support the view that while it may include sympathy for his political agenda, support for Trump is also often rooted in personality structure. Members and supporters of Stand Up for Workers PAC inclined to undertake the delicate process of seeking to persuade voters to reconsider their views prior to the upcoming elections may want to bear these revelations in mind when they enter the discussion. Issues like affordability are of course critical, but Trump loyalists’ support is also due to voters’ personality structure.
Anyone making such efforts may also wish to recall the proverbial aphorism that “a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.”
Written By Paul Merry, SU4W Board Member
