An Analysis of Trump Supporters Has Identified 5 Key Traits

the watchman

Former Staff
Jul 2011
90,331
55,522
becoming more and more
#1
The lightning-fast ascent and political invincibility of Donald Trump has left many experts baffled and wondering, “How did we get here?” Any accurate and sufficient answer to that question must not only focus on Trump himself, but also on his uniquely loyal supporters. Given their extreme devotion and unwavering admiration for their highly unpredictable and often inflammatory leader, some have turned to the field of psychology for scientific explanations based on precise quantitative data and established theoretical frameworks
An Analysis of Trump Supporters Has Identified 5 Key Traits

1. Authoritarian Personality Syndrome
2. Social dominance orientation
3. Prejudice
4. Intergroup contact
5. Relative deprivation


Authoritarianism is not a new, untested concept in the American electorate. Since the rise of Nazi Germany, it has been one of the most widely studied ideas in social science. While its causes are still debated, the political behavior of authoritarians is not. Authoritarians obey. They rally to and follow strong leaders. And they respond aggressively to outsiders, especially when they feel threatened. From pledging to “make America great again” by building a wall on the border to promising to close mosques and ban Muslims from visiting the United States, Trump is playing directly to authoritarian inclinations.
The One Weird Trait That Predicts Whether You’re a Trump Supporter

The study suggests the bulk of his supporters, at least in the Republican primaries, were not old-fashioned conservatives who preach obedience and respect for authority. Rather, they were people who take a belligerent, combative approach toward people they find threatening.
https://psmag.com/news/inside-the-minds-of-hardcore-trump-supporters
The most common examples of unfair bias are based on stereotypes about another person's race, ethnicity, gender, religion, or sexuality. This type of bias can have harmful real-world outcomes, and can also increase susceptibility to “stereotype threat,” the phenomenon in which people behave in certain ways to avoid confirming a common stereotype about their own particular group.
Bias | Psychology Today

spot on isn't it? Candidates for president in the coming election world be wise to adopt an inclusive narrative that's responsive to these considerations.
 
Jul 2014
35,582
9,326
midwest
#5
As for number 5, I can think of a relative or two that I would not mind being deprived of.

That would probably be true of many Trump Haters, as well...
 
Likes: pragmatic

the watchman

Former Staff
Jul 2011
90,331
55,522
becoming more and more
#6
It explains the psychotic nature of the OP.
uh, nope. The OP is about Trump supporters not either conservatives or liberals. You're presenting a "false choice" argument. There's nothing at all psychotic about the OP. How would you even know when it's obviously you had a knee jerk reaction to the topic itself and didn't even bother to read through any of the links in the OP?
 
Likes: ATLglock
Jan 2007
34,023
7,313
#7
What is intergroup contact?
Guess I''ll support Trump until something better comes along. Hillary sure wasn't it. Judging by your field of candidates for 2020 , may have to do it again.

Make illegals Great Again.
 

the watchman

Former Staff
Jul 2011
90,331
55,522
becoming more and more
#8
What is intergroup contact?
Guess I''ll support Trump until something better comes along. Hillary sure wasn't it. Judging by your field of candidates for 2020 , may have to do it again.

Make illegals Great Again.
you might find this interesting:
Concern regarding the growing ethnic diversity of many countries has assumed prominence in recent public and political debates. Be it the re-emergence of far-right parties or voting patterns driven, in part, by immigration fears, such as the UK decision to leave the EU (Clarke, Goodwin, and Whiteley 2017) or the US election of Donald Trump (Major, Blodorn, and Blascovich 2016; Pettigrew 2017), we appear to be (re-)entering a period in which rising ethnic minority populations are perceived as a threat to societal cohesion. This public and political debate overlaps with academic debates stretching back over sixty years into how increasing out-group populations affect inter-group attitudes, broadly divided into two opposing theories: the threat and contact hypotheses. The evidence for whether out-group attitudes worsen (threat hypothesis) or improve (contact hypothesis) as the size of ethnic out-groups increases remains mixed, suggesting the relationship may be more complex and potentially contingent on other factors (Hopkins 2010; Rocha and Espino 2009). In this paper, we aim to explore the largely overlooked role of segregation in this debate.
Theories into how out-group size in an environment affects prejudice are generally divided into the threat and contact hypotheses (for a full discussion of theories, see Oliver and Wong [2003]). The threat hypothesis states that “a superordinate group (e.g., whites) becomes more racially hostile as the size of a proximate subordinate group increases…threaten[ing] the former’s economic and social privilege” and increasing prejudice (Key 1949; Oliver and Wong 2003, 568)

Prejudice, Contact, and Threat at the Diversity-Segregation Nexus: A Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Analysis of How Ethnic Out-Group Size and Segregation Interrelate for Inter-Group Relations