Authoritarianism, Anomia, and Prejudice

Previous studies of the relationship of authoritarianism and anomia to prejudice have yielded inconsistent results. This study of 1,018 college and university students finds that authoritarianism is more highly correlated to prejudice than is anomia. Possible reasons for the varying results of the studies are examined. McDill's contention that there is a common general factor-a negative world view-underlying each of the scales is rejected on the basis of a factor analysis which reveals six distinct factors, none of which accounts for more than 13.5 percent of the total variance. It is concluded that the previous studies may have been compromised by acquiescence and other response biases and that there is little profit in attempting to determine the relative importance of authoritarianism and anomia as correlates of prejudice until better measures of the variables are developed which are relatively free of response bias. ince the publication of The Auth-oritarian Personality by Adorno and his associates in 1950 there have been literally hundreds of studies employing the F scale, in spite of numerous critical salvos directed against the conceptual and methodological weaknesses of the original study (cf. Christie and Jahoda, 1954; Roghmann, 1966; Kirscht and Dillehay, 1967). Among sociologists there has been a similar kind of attention, though on a lesser scale, devoted to Srole's (1951, 1956) scale for measuring "anomia." Perhaps because it is so difficult to translate Durkheim's conception of anomie into operational terms, sociologists eagerly seized upon Srole's suggestion that the focus be shifted from the question of the degree of integration of society to the individual's own personal sense of normlessness-which was presumably easier to measure. Again there have been a great many studies utilizing the Srole anomia scale, but there have been only occasional critical studies of the scale, even though it shares some of the same weaknesses as the F scale. Both the Adorno and the Srole studies were originally concerned with attitudes toward minority groups, but in both instances it was discovered that the newly developed scalesF and A-showed substantial positive correlations with prejudice. The F scale and the A scale are derived from different theoretical and conceptual frameworks, but their common relations to prejudice as well as some resemblances in manifest content prompted social psychologists to explore the interrelationships of authoritarianism, anomia, and prejudice. Srole's original study was carried out in 1950 in Springfield, Massachusetts, and was based upon interviews with 401 white, Christian, native-born transit riders 16 years of age or over. Srole reported that he found a higher correlation between anomia and prejudice toward minorities than between authoritarianism and prejudice. Furthermore, using partial correlations, he found that the original correlation between A and prejudice was only "negligibly reduced" when F was controlled. The correlation between F and prejudice, however, was substantially reduced when A was controlled. He (1956:715) concluded that "F scores do not stand in a close relationship to M (prejudice toward minorities) independently of the anomia factor." This conclusion did not long stand unchallenged. In 1952 a replication was carried out * This article was written by the authors in their private capacity. No official support or endorsement by the HSMHA is intended or should be inferred. Use of the University of Wisconsin Computing Center was made possible through support, in part, from the National Science Foundation and the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (WARF) through the University of Wisconsin Research Committee. We are indebted to George Bohrnstedt and Edgar F. Borgatta for critical advice and assistance. This content downloaded from 157.55.39.104 on Sun, 19 Jun 2016 05:51:08 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms