Right-Wing Authoritarianism [2016]

A Politico-Psychological Analysis

Report generated

March 23, 2026

1 Study Characteristics

1.1 Items: Right-Wing Authoritarianism

1.2 Sample

N=1500

To conduct a exploratory and a confirmatory large surveys during the general election, we hired a professional survey firm (SSI, a US-based market research company that recruits participants from a panel of 7,139,027 American citizens; more information can be found at www.surveysampling.com (now https://www.dynata.com/) to recruit a nationally representative sample of 1,500 Americans (50.7% women) who completed study materials during the general election from August 16-September 9, 2016. (Information about sampling and exclusion criteria is included in the Supplement). The age distribution was as follows: 18-24 (12.9%), 25-34 (17.6%), 35-44 (17.5%), 45-54 (19.5%), 55-65 (15.6%) and older than 65 (16.9%). The ethnic breakdown was: White/European American (82.5%), Black/African American (7.7%), Latino (5.9%) and “Other” (4.0%). Concerning religion, 67.6% identified as Christian, 17.1% as religiously affiliated but not Christian, and 15.3% as Atheist/Agnostic. With respect to education 35.1% indicated “high school only or lower,” 31.4 % indicated “some college,” and 33.6% indicated having received a “Bachelor” or “Graduate” degree. 2424 participants were directed to the survey, 1885 of which finished the survey (attrition rate 22%).

We followed recommendations to minimize the problem of careless responding in online studies. Specifically, we employed 10 random attention questions and time controls to check for data quality. There were 385 participants who failed more than one attention check or finished the survey in under ~22 minutes and were therefore excluded from the sample. For the 1500 participants who successfully finished the survey, completion time was 67 minutes on average (MD: 51min).

2 Descriptives

2.1 Means, SD, Range, & SE

Table 1: Descriptives

Descriptives for Right-Wing Authoritarianism
	mean	sd	median	se
Aggression_mean	5.52	1.66	5.25	0.04
Submission_mean	4.76	1.48	5.00	0.04
Conventionalism_mean	5.30	2.03	5.25	0.05
RWA	5.20	1.47	5.17	0.04
Note:
n = 1500, min = 1, max = 9

Table 2: Descriptives – Item Level

Descriptives for Right-Wing Authoritarianism at Item Level
	mean	sd	median	se
Aggression1	5.36	2.61	5.00	0.07
Aggression2	4.13	2.62	5.00	0.07
Aggression3	6.51	2.46	7.00	0.06
Aggression4	6.09	2.26	6.00	0.06
Submission1	6.24	2.30	7.00	0.06
Submission2	5.81	2.35	6.00	0.06
Submission3	2.47	2.05	1.00	0.05
Submission4	4.53	2.40	5.00	0.06
Conventionalism1	5.38	2.61	5.00	0.07
Conventionalism2	6.03	2.25	6.00	0.06
Conventionalism3	5.40	2.82	5.00	0.07
Conventionalism4	4.39	2.97	4.00	0.08
RWA	5.20	1.47	5.17	0.04
Aggression_mean	5.52	1.66	5.25	0.04
Submission_mean	4.76	1.48	5.00	0.04
Conventionalism_mean	5.30	2.03	5.25	0.05
Note:
All items: n = 1500, min = 1, max = 9. RWA: min = 1, max = 9. Aggression_mean: min = 1, max = 9. Submission_mean: min = 1, max = 9. Conventionalism_mean: min = 1, max = 9

2.2 Response Distribution

Figure 1: Proportion of each facet of Right-Wing Authoritarianism at item level: Aggression

Figure 2: Proportion of each facet of Right-Wing Authoritarianism at item level: Submission

Figure 3: Proportion of each facet of Right-Wing Authoritarianism at item level: Conventionalism

2.3 Correlations

2.3.1 Correlation Plots

Figure 7: Bivariate Spearman correlations: Right-Wing Authoritarianism

Figure 8: Bivariate Spearman correlations: Aggression

Figure 9: Bivariate Spearman correlations: Submission

Figure 10: Bivariate Spearman correlations: Conventionalism

Note. Upper triangle shows Spearman’s rank-order correlations. *** p < .001, ** p < .01, * p < .05.

2.3.2 PIDF

Figure 11: Bivariate Spearman correlations by party identity: Right-Wing Authoritarianism

Figure 12: Bivariate Spearman correlations by party identity: Aggression

Figure 13: Bivariate Spearman correlations by party identity: Submission

Figure 14: Bivariate Spearman correlations by party identity: Conventionalism

Note. Upper triangle shows Spearman’s rank-order correlations by party identity. *** p < .001, ** p < .01, * p < .05.

2.3.3 Correlation Matrix

3 Demographics

3.1 Social Class

Note on the Raincloud Plots

Statistical summary (top): Welch’s t-test (or ANOVA) results, effect size, confidence intervals, p-values, and sample sizes are shown above each plot.
Bayesian analysis (bottom): Log Bayes factor and credible intervals are reported below each plot.

Table 3

Table 4: Conventionalism as grouped by SES

(a)

SES	N	Mean	SD
Poor	38	0.12	1.20
Lower Middle Class	298	-0.07	1.00
Middle Middle Class	679	0.12	1.01
Upper Middle Class	395	-0.10	0.97
Rich	90	-0.27	0.87

(b)

SES	N	Mean	SD
Poor	38	0.06	1.22
Lower Middle Class	298	-0.09	0.94
Middle Middle Class	679	0.14	1.01
Upper Middle Class	395	-0.12	0.96
Rich	90	-0.28	1.01

(c)

SES	N	Mean	SD
Poor	38	0.21	1.15
Lower Middle Class	298	0.00	1.01
Middle Middle Class	679	0.08	1.03
Upper Middle Class	395	-0.11	0.94
Rich	90	-0.19	0.86

(d)

SES	N	Mean	SD
Poor	38	0.06	1.10
Lower Middle Class	298	-0.07	1.02
Middle Middle Class	679	0.08	1.00
Upper Middle Class	395	-0.04	1.00
Rich	90	-0.21	0.80

3.2 Gender

Figure 23: Right-Wing Authoritarianism Facets, as grouped by Gender: Right-Wing Authoritarianism

Figure 24: Right-Wing Authoritarianism Facets, as grouped by Gender: Aggression

Figure 25: Right-Wing Authoritarianism Facets, as grouped by Gender: Submission

Figure 26: Right-Wing Authoritarianism Facets, as grouped by Gender: Conventionalism

Table 5

Table 6: Conventionalism as grouped by Gender

(a)

Gender	N	Mean	SD
Female	760	-0.08	1.01
Male	740	0.09	0.98

(b)

Gender	N	Mean	SD
Female	760	-0.04	0.96
Male	740	0.04	1.04

(c)

Gender	N	Mean	SD
Female	760	-0.07	1.04
Male	740	0.07	0.96

(d)

Gender	N	Mean	SD
Female	760	-0.1	1.02
Male	740	0.1	0.97

3.3 Age

Table 7

Table 8: Conventionalism as grouped by Age

(a)

Age	N	Mean	SD
18-24 years	193	-0.31	0.91
25-34 years	264	-0.32	1.03
35-44 years	263	-0.10	0.98
45-54 years	292	0.17	0.97
55-64 years	234	0.12	1.03
65+	254	0.37	0.88

(b)

Age	N	Mean	SD
18-24 years	193	-0.30	0.83
25-34 years	264	-0.17	0.97
35-44 years	263	-0.05	0.97
45-54 years	292	0.17	1.04
55-64 years	234	0.00	1.03
65+	254	0.26	1.00

(c)

Age	N	Mean	SD
18-24 years	193	-0.13	1.07
25-34 years	264	-0.27	1.09
35-44 years	263	-0.07	1.05
45-54 years	292	0.13	0.91
55-64 years	234	0.09	0.95
65+	254	0.22	0.85

(d)

Age	N	Mean	SD
18-24 years	193	-0.34	0.92
25-34 years	264	-0.35	0.99
35-44 years	263	-0.12	1.01
45-54 years	292	0.12	0.96
55-64 years	234	0.20	0.99
65+	254	0.43	0.88

3.4 Education

Table 9

Table 10: Conventionalism as grouped by Education

(a)

Education	N	Mean	SD
Less than High School	51	0.02	1.12
High School	475	0.09	0.93
Some College	471	0.07	1.03
Bachelor	310	-0.10	0.99
Graduate	193	-0.25	1.03

(b)

Education	N	Mean	SD
Less than High School	51	-0.06	1.12
High School	475	0.11	0.94
Some College	471	0.09	1.01
Bachelor	310	-0.13	0.99
Graduate	193	-0.26	1.02

(c)

Education	N	Mean	SD
Less than High School	51	0.12	1.05
High School	475	0.07	0.97
Some College	471	0.06	1.03
Bachelor	310	-0.08	0.97
Graduate	193	-0.21	1.00

(d)

Education	N	Mean	SD
Less than High School	51	0.01	1.10
High School	475	0.05	0.93
Some College	471	0.04	1.05
Bachelor	310	-0.05	0.99
Graduate	193	-0.16	1.01

3.5 Income Levels

Table 11

Table 12: Conventionalism as grouped by Income Levels

(a)

Income Levels	N	Mean	SD
Less than $15,000	178	-0.12	1.06
$15,000-$24,999	180	0.04	0.98
$25,000-$34,999	176	0.06	1.04
$35,000-$49,999	227	0.00	0.99
$50,000-$74,999	292	0.04	1.01
$75,000-$99,999	192	0.07	0.99
$100,000-$149,999	160	-0.06	0.93
$150,000 +	95	-0.14	0.94

(b)

Income Levels	N	Mean	SD
Less than $15,000	178	-0.13	0.97
$15,000-$24,999	180	0.04	0.99
$25,000-$34,999	176	0.05	1.08
$35,000-$49,999	227	0.06	0.97
$50,000-$74,999	292	0.03	0.99
$75,000-$99,999	192	-0.01	1.06
$100,000-$149,999	160	-0.06	0.93
$150,000 +	95	-0.05	1.02

(c)

Income Levels	N	Mean	SD
Less than $15,000	178	-0.06	1.05
$15,000-$24,999	180	0.06	1.03
$25,000-$34,999	176	0.03	1.01
$35,000-$49,999	227	-0.02	1.03
$50,000-$74,999	292	0.04	1.04
$75,000-$99,999	192	0.07	0.95
$100,000-$149,999	160	-0.05	0.89
$150,000 +	95	-0.18	0.92

(d)

Income Levels	N	Mean	SD
Less than $15,000	178	-0.11	1.07
$15,000-$24,999	180	0.02	0.99
$25,000-$34,999	176	0.07	1.06
$35,000-$49,999	227	-0.03	0.98
$50,000-$74,999	292	0.03	1.01
$75,000-$99,999	192	0.11	0.95
$100,000-$149,999	160	-0.04	1.00
$150,000 +	95	-0.13	0.87

3.6 Ethnicity

Note on the Okabe-Ito color palette. The Okabe-Ito color palette (seen above) is a set of colorblind-friendly categorical colors available in R. We are using this palette for graphs with non-ordered variables (e.g., groups, categories) for accessibility.

Table 13

Table 14: Conventionalism as grouped by Ethnicity

(a)

Ethnicity	N	Mean	SD
Caucasian/European origin	1237	0.06	1.02
Black/African American	115	-0.27	0.84
Latino	88	-0.32	0.87
Asian/Pacific Islander	29	-0.35	0.59
Native American	13	0.19	0.59
Other	18	-0.25	1.16

(b)

Ethnicity	N	Mean	SD
Caucasian/European origin	1237	0.07	1.00
Black/African American	115	-0.47	0.85
Latino	88	-0.24	0.97
Asian/Pacific Islander	29	-0.40	0.63
Native American	13	0.04	0.99
Other	18	-0.07	1.21

(c)

Ethnicity	N	Mean	SD
Caucasian/European origin	1237	0.04	1.01
Black/African American	115	-0.20	0.93
Latino	88	-0.18	0.90
Asian/Pacific Islander	29	-0.17	0.67
Native American	13	-0.03	0.96
Other	18	-0.27	1.18

(d)

Ethnicity	N	Mean	SD
Caucasian/European origin	1237	0.04	1.02
Black/African American	115	-0.06	0.94
Latino	88	-0.36	0.86
Asian/Pacific Islander	29	-0.32	0.58
Native American	13	0.40	0.71
Other	18	-0.28	1.09

3.7 Occupation

Table 15

Table 16: Conventionalism as grouped by Occupation

(a)

Occupation	N	Mean	SD
Employed	768	-0.08	0.98
Retired	268	0.29	0.91
Unemployed	146	-0.24	1.06
Parent	104	0.20	0.89
Disabled	98	0.31	1.03
Student	85	-0.46	1.14
Full-time caregiver	31	0.17	0.91

(b)

Occupation	N	Mean	SD
Employed	768	-0.07	0.98
Retired	268	0.19	1.01
Unemployed	146	-0.18	1.04
Parent	104	0.28	0.92
Disabled	98	0.25	1.07
Student	85	-0.39	0.93
Full-time caregiver	31	0.18	0.65

(c)

Occupation	N	Mean	SD
Employed	768	-0.06	0.99
Retired	268	0.16	0.87
Unemployed	146	-0.14	1.04
Parent	104	0.16	0.94
Disabled	98	0.35	1.02
Student	85	-0.35	1.27
Full-time caregiver	31	0.17	0.97

(d)

Occupation	N	Mean	SD
Employed	768	-0.07	0.97
Retired	268	0.36	0.92
Unemployed	146	-0.28	1.03
Parent	104	0.07	0.98
Disabled	98	0.22	1.01
Student	85	-0.43	1.08
Full-time caregiver	31	0.09	0.97

3.8 Area

Table 17

Table 18: Conventionalism as grouped by Area

(a)

Area	N	Mean	SD
Urban	955	-0.13	1.01
Rural	545	0.22	0.94

(b)

Area	N	Mean	SD
Urban	955	-0.11	1.02
Rural	545	0.20	0.93

(c)

Area	N	Mean	SD
Urban	955	-0.11	0.99
Rural	545	0.19	0.99

(d)

Area	N	Mean	SD
Urban	955	-0.10	1.01
Rural	545	0.18	0.96

3.9 Religious Affiliation

Table 19

Table 20: Conventionalism as grouped by Religious Affiliation

(a)

Religious Affiliation	N	Mean	SD
Christian	1014	0.30	0.87
Muslim	9	-0.21	0.32
Jewish	52	-0.49	1.03
Atheist/Agnostic	230	-0.88	0.96
Not listed, No religion	195	-0.38	0.89

(b)

Religious Affiliation	N	Mean	SD
Christian	1014	0.17	0.93
Muslim	9	-0.23	0.13
Jewish	52	-0.29	1.21
Atheist/Agnostic	230	-0.57	1.05
Not listed, No religion	195	-0.15	0.97

(c)

Religious Affiliation	N	Mean	SD
Christian	1014	0.24	0.88
Muslim	9	0.09	0.61
Jewish	52	-0.48	0.97
Atheist/Agnostic	230	-0.71	1.09
Not listed, No religion	195	-0.29	0.98

(d)

Religious Affiliation	N	Mean	SD
Christian	1014	0.33	0.90
Muslim	9	-0.33	0.38
Jewish	52	-0.46	0.87
Atheist/Agnostic	230	-0.93	0.79
Not listed, No religion	195	-0.49	0.84

3.10 Section Summary

	Right-Wing Authoritarianism
Predictors	Estimates	CI	p
(Intercept)	4.82	4.52 – 5.12	<.001
Age	0.24	0.19 – 0.28	<.001
Income	0.01	-0.03 – 0.05	.524
Education	-0.23	-0.31 – -0.16	<.001
Gender (Male)	0.13	-0.01 – 0.28	.073
Observations	1500
R² / R² adjusted	.085 / .083

4 Political Behavior

4.1 Political Orientation

Correlation with General Conservatism, Economic Conservatism, Social Conservatism

Note. The y-axis shows residuals after regressing the outcome on demographics (Age, Income, Education, Gender). This illustrates how much the focal construct explains beyond demographic factors.

Table 21: Right-Wing Authoritarianism and Political Orientation

	Political Orientation			Social Political Orientation			Economic Political Orientation			Composite Political Orientation
Predictors	Estimates	CI	p	Estimates	CI	p	Estimates	CI	p	Estimates	CI	p
(Intercept)	5.31	5.21 – 5.40	<.001	4.93	4.82 – 5.03	<.001	5.48	5.37 – 5.59	<.001	5.24	5.15 – 5.33	<.001
Right-Wing Authoritarianism	1.55	1.45 – 1.64	<.001	1.83	1.72 – 1.93	<.001	1.40	1.29 – 1.51	<.001	1.59	1.50 – 1.68	<.001
Observations	1500			1500			1500			1500
R² / R² adjusted	.398 / .397			.438 / .438			.283 / .283			.431 / .431

	Political Orientation			Social Political Orientation			Economic Political Orientation			Composite Political Orientation
Predictors	Estimates	CI	p	Estimates	CI	p	Estimates	CI	p	Estimates	CI	p
(Intercept)	5.31	5.20 – 5.41	<.001	4.93	4.81 – 5.05	<.001	5.48	5.36 – 5.60	<.001	5.24	5.13 – 5.34	<.001
Aggression	1.19	1.08 – 1.30	<.001	1.32	1.19 – 1.44	<.001	1.13	1.01 – 1.25	<.001	1.21	1.10 – 1.32	<.001
Observations	1500			1500			1500			1500
R² / R² adjusted	.235 / .235			.228 / .227			.183 / .183			.250 / .249

	Political Orientation			Social Political Orientation			Economic Political Orientation			Composite Political Orientation
Predictors	Estimates	CI	p	Estimates	CI	p	Estimates	CI	p	Estimates	CI	p
(Intercept)	5.31	5.20 – 5.41	<.001	4.93	4.81 – 5.05	<.001	5.48	5.36 – 5.60	<.001	5.24	5.13 – 5.34	<.001
Submission	1.19	1.09 – 1.30	<.001	1.43	1.31 – 1.55	<.001	1.03	0.90 – 1.15	<.001	1.22	1.11 – 1.32	<.001
Observations	1500			1500			1500			1500
R² / R² adjusted	.237 / .236			.267 / .266			.152 / .152			.252 / .251

	Political Orientation			Social Political Orientation			Economic Political Orientation			Composite Political Orientation
Predictors	Estimates	CI	p	Estimates	CI	p	Estimates	CI	p	Estimates	CI	p
(Intercept)	5.31	5.21 – 5.40	<.001	4.93	4.83 – 5.03	<.001	5.48	5.36 – 5.59	<.001	5.24	5.14 – 5.33	<.001
Conventionalism	1.51	1.41 – 1.61	<.001	1.85	1.74 – 1.95	<.001	1.37	1.25 – 1.48	<.001	1.58	1.48 – 1.67	<.001
Observations	1500			1500			1500			1500
R² / R² adjusted	.380 / .380			.447 / .446			.270 / .270			.422 / .422

Table 22: Right-Wing Authoritarianism models and Demographics

	Political Orientation			Social Political Orientation			Economic Political Orientation			Composite Political Orientation
Predictors	Estimates	CI	p	Estimates	CI	p	Estimates	CI	p	Estimates	CI	p
(Intercept)	-1.55	-2.07 – -1.03	<.001	-2.51	-3.08 – -1.94	<.001	-1.62	-2.22 – -1.03	<.001	-1.89	-2.39 – -1.40	<.001
RWA	1.02	0.95 – 1.09	<.001	1.21	1.14 – 1.28	<.001	0.93	0.85 – 1.01	<.001	1.05	0.99 – 1.12	<.001
Age	0.08	0.01 – 0.14	.018	0.07	-0.00 – 0.14	.056	0.08	0.01 – 0.16	.022	0.08	0.02 – 0.14	.013
Income	0.06	0.01 – 0.12	.021	-0.03	-0.09 – 0.03	.291	0.11	0.05 – 0.17	<.001	0.05	-0.00 – 0.10	.063
Education	0.05	-0.05 – 0.15	.337	0.04	-0.07 – 0.15	.471	0.19	0.08 – 0.31	.001	0.09	-0.00 – 0.19	.056
Gender (Male)	0.57	0.38 – 0.77	<.001	0.61	0.40 – 0.82	<.001	0.60	0.37 – 0.82	<.001	0.59	0.41 – 0.78	<.001
Observations	1500			1500			1500			1500
R² / R² adjusted	.424 / .422			.453 / .452			.330 / .327			.460 / .458

4.2 Partisanship

Table 23: Mean Right-Wing Authoritarianism by Party Identity (raw means)

Party Identity	N	Mean	SD
Strong Democrat	351	4.19	1.44
Democrat	223	4.85	1.20
Leaning Democrat	124	4.32	1.34
Independent	84	5.12	1.10
Leaning Republican	111	5.51	1.12
Republican	255	5.87	1.05
Strong Republican	318	6.31	1.12

Table 24: Mean Aggression by Party Identity (raw means)

Party Identity	N	Mean	SD
Strong Democrat	351	4.49	1.66
Democrat	223	5.28	1.51
Leaning Democrat	124	4.90	1.47
Independent	84	5.53	1.43
Leaning Republican	111	5.85	1.45
Republican	255	6.14	1.34
Strong Republican	318	6.50	1.41

Table 25: Mean Submission by Party Identity (raw means)

Party Identity	N	Mean	SD
Strong Democrat	351	4.04	1.56
Democrat	223	4.52	1.22
Leaning Democrat	124	3.99	1.46
Independent	84	4.79	1.34
Leaning Republican	111	4.94	1.35
Republican	255	5.27	1.12
Strong Republican	318	5.63	1.23

Table 26: Mean Conventionalism by Party Identity (raw means)

Party Identity	N	Mean	SD
Strong Democrat	351	4.04	1.95
Democrat	223	4.76	1.75
Leaning Democrat	124	4.06	1.80
Independent	84	5.02	1.42
Leaning Republican	111	5.73	1.74
Republican	255	6.20	1.57
Strong Republican	318	6.79	1.60

Table 27: Right-Wing Authoritarianism & Party Identity (7-point)

	Right-Wing Authoritarianism
Predictors	Estimates	CI	p
(Intercept)	3.87	3.74 – 3.99	<.001
Party Identity (7-point)	0.34	0.31 – 0.36	<.001
Observations	1466
R² / R² adjusted	.293 / .293

	Aggression
Predictors	Estimates	CI	p
(Intercept)	4.29	4.14 – 4.44	<.001
Party Identity (7-point)	0.31	0.28 – 0.35	<.001
Observations	1466
R² / R² adjusted	.197 / .196

	Submission
Predictors	Estimates	CI	p
(Intercept)	3.77	3.64 – 3.91	<.001
Party Identity (7-point)	0.25	0.22 – 0.28	<.001
Observations	1466
R² / R² adjusted	.165 / .164

	Conventionalism
Predictors	Estimates	CI	p
(Intercept)	3.54	3.36 – 3.71	<.001
Party Identity (7-point)	0.45	0.41 – 0.48	<.001
Observations	1466
R² / R² adjusted	.267 / .266

Table 28: Right-Wing Authoritarianism & Party Identity with Controls

	Right-Wing Authoritarianism
Predictors	Estimates	CI	p
(Intercept)	4.22	3.96 – 4.49	<.001
Party Identity (7-point)	0.32	0.30 – 0.35	<.001
Age	0.15	0.11 – 0.19	<.001
Income	-0.02	-0.05 – 0.02	.355
Education	-0.18	-0.25 – -0.12	<.001
Gender (Male)	-0.14	-0.27 – -0.01	.033
Observations	1466
R² / R² adjusted	.331 / .329

	Aggression
Predictors	Estimates	CI	p
(Intercept)	4.87	4.55 – 5.20	<.001
Party Identity (7-point)	0.31	0.27 – 0.34	<.001
Age	0.12	0.07 – 0.17	<.001
Income	0.00	-0.04 – 0.05	.871
Education	-0.22	-0.30 – -0.14	<.001
Gender (Male)	-0.20	-0.36 – -0.04	.012
Observations	1466
R² / R² adjusted	.226 / .223

	Submission
Predictors	Estimates	CI	p
(Intercept)	4.13	3.83 – 4.43	<.001
Party Identity (7-point)	0.25	0.22 – 0.28	<.001
Age	0.08	0.04 – 0.12	<.001
Income	-0.02	-0.06 – 0.02	.392
Education	-0.14	-0.22 – -0.07	<.001
Gender (Male)	-0.07	-0.21 – 0.07	.354
Observations	1466
R² / R² adjusted	.182 / .179

	Conventionalism
Predictors	Estimates	CI	p
(Intercept)	3.67	3.29 – 4.05	<.001
Party Identity (7-point)	0.42	0.38 – 0.46	<.001
Age	0.25	0.20 – 0.31	<.001
Income	-0.04	-0.08 – 0.01	.150
Education	-0.18	-0.27 – -0.09	<.001
Gender (Male)	-0.15	-0.33 – 0.03	.100
Observations	1466
R² / R² adjusted	.309 / .306

4.3 Religiosity

Note. The y-axis shows residuals after regressing the outcome on demographics (Age, Income, Education, Gender). This illustrates how much the focal construct explains beyond demographic factors.

4.4 Candidate Preferences

Table 29: Candidate Preference and Right-Wing Authoritarianism [centered]

Candidate Preference	N	Mean	SD
Donald Trump	444	0.63	0.75
Hillary Clinton	371	-0.36	0.86
Bernie Sanders	362	-0.69	0.95
Ted Cruz	122	0.70	0.73
Jeb Bush	83	0.24	0.67
Gary Johnson	68	-0.16	0.81
Rand Paul	44	0.24	0.87

Table 30: Candidate Preference and Aggression [centered]

Candidate Preference	N	Mean	SD
Donald Trump	444	0.61	0.84
Hillary Clinton	371	-0.39	0.89
Bernie Sanders	362	-0.53	0.98
Ted Cruz	122	0.44	0.71
Jeb Bush	83	0.21	0.76
Gary Johnson	68	-0.19	0.87
Rand Paul	44	0.18	0.93

Table 31: Candidate Preference and Submission [centered]

Candidate Preference	N	Mean	SD
Donald Trump	444	0.46	0.82
Hillary Clinton	371	-0.23	0.91
Bernie Sanders	362	-0.53	1.03
Ted Cruz	122	0.52	0.95
Jeb Bush	83	0.09	0.69
Gary Johnson	68	-0.11	0.95
Rand Paul	44	0.24	1.02

Table 32: Candidate Preference and Conventionalism [centered]

Candidate Preference	N	Mean	SD
Donald Trump	444	0.54	0.80
Hillary Clinton	371	-0.30	0.88
Bernie Sanders	362	-0.68	0.91
Ted Cruz	122	0.77	0.79
Jeb Bush	83	0.27	0.83
Gary Johnson	68	-0.11	0.74
Rand Paul	44	0.20	0.89

Table 33: Candidate Preference and Right-Wing Authoritarianism [raw means]

Candidate Preference	N	Mean	SD
Donald Trump	444	6.13	1.10
Hillary Clinton	371	4.66	1.26
Bernie Sanders	362	4.18	1.39
Ted Cruz	122	6.22	1.07
Jeb Bush	83	5.54	0.98
Gary Johnson	68	4.97	1.18
Rand Paul	44	5.55	1.28

Table 34: Candidate Preference and Aggression [raw means]

Candidate Preference	N	Mean	SD
Donald Trump	444	6.53	1.39
Hillary Clinton	371	4.87	1.47
Bernie Sanders	362	4.64	1.63
Ted Cruz	122	6.25	1.18
Jeb Bush	83	5.87	1.27
Gary Johnson	68	5.21	1.44
Rand Paul	44	5.82	1.55

Table 35: Candidate Preference and Submission [raw means]

Candidate Preference	N	Mean	SD
Donald Trump	444	5.45	1.21
Hillary Clinton	371	4.42	1.34
Bernie Sanders	362	3.98	1.52
Ted Cruz	122	5.53	1.40
Jeb Bush	83	4.90	1.01
Gary Johnson	68	4.61	1.40
Rand Paul	44	5.11	1.50

Table 36: Candidate Preference and Conventionalism [raw means]

Candidate Preference	N	Mean	SD
Donald Trump	444	6.40	1.64
Hillary Clinton	371	4.69	1.80
Bernie Sanders	362	3.91	1.86
Ted Cruz	122	6.87	1.61
Jeb Bush	83	5.86	1.69
Gary Johnson	68	5.08	1.51
Rand Paul	44	5.72	1.82

4.5 Party Preferences

Table 37: Party Preference and Right-Wing Authoritarianism [centered]

Party Preference	N	Mean	SD
Democratic Party	560	-0.53	0.91
Republican Party	508	0.59	0.73
Libertarian Party	100	-0.30	0.91
Green Party	40	-1.24	1.04
Tea Party	68	0.90	0.74
Constitution Party	14	0.52	0.84
None	120	-0.01	0.79
Don't know	90	0.09	0.84

Table 38: Party Preference and Aggression [centered]

Party Preference	N	Mean	SD
Democratic Party	560	-0.45	0.93
Republican Party	508	0.48	0.82
Libertarian Party	100	-0.14	0.90
Green Party	40	-1.00	1.23
Tea Party	68	0.78	0.76
Constitution Party	14	0.00	1.16
None	120	0.05	0.89
Don't know	90	0.07	0.85

Table 39: Party Preference and Submission [centered]

Party Preference	N	Mean	SD
Democratic Party	560	-0.37	0.98
Republican Party	508	0.45	0.77
Libertarian Party	100	-0.24	1.10
Green Party	40	-1.11	1.02
Tea Party	68	0.50	1.00
Constitution Party	14	0.42	0.81
None	120	-0.03	0.89
Don't know	90	0.11	0.91

Table 40: Party Preference and Conventionalism [centered]

Party Preference	N	Mean	SD
Democratic Party	560	-0.50	0.91
Republican Party	508	0.55	0.79
Libertarian Party	100	-0.35	0.85
Green Party	40	-1.08	0.85
Tea Party	68	0.94	0.75
Constitution Party	14	0.82	0.65
None	120	-0.04	0.82
Don't know	90	0.05	0.86

Table 41: Party Preference and Right-Wing Authoritarianism [raw means]

Party Preference	N	Mean	SD
Democratic Party	560	4.42	1.33
Republican Party	508	6.06	1.08
Libertarian Party	100	4.76	1.34
Green Party	40	3.37	1.53
Tea Party	68	6.51	1.09
Constitution Party	14	5.95	1.24
None	120	5.18	1.16
Don't know	90	5.32	1.23

Table 42: Party Preference and Aggression [raw means]

Party Preference	N	Mean	SD
Democratic Party	560	4.77	1.55
Republican Party	508	6.32	1.36
Libertarian Party	100	5.29	1.50
Green Party	40	3.86	2.04
Tea Party	68	6.82	1.26
Constitution Party	14	5.52	1.93
None	120	5.60	1.49
Don't know	90	5.64	1.42

Table 43: Party Preference and Submission [raw means]

Party Preference	N	Mean	SD
Democratic Party	560	4.22	1.44
Republican Party	508	5.43	1.14
Libertarian Party	100	4.41	1.63
Green Party	40	3.13	1.51
Tea Party	68	5.50	1.48
Constitution Party	14	5.38	1.20
None	120	4.72	1.31
Don't know	90	4.92	1.35

Table 44: Party Preference and Conventionalism [raw means]

Party Preference	N	Mean	SD
Democratic Party	560	4.29	1.86
Republican Party	508	6.43	1.61
Libertarian Party	100	4.58	1.73
Green Party	40	3.11	1.73
Tea Party	68	7.22	1.53
Constitution Party	14	6.96	1.32
None	120	5.22	1.67
Don't know	90	5.41	1.75

4.6 Voting

Table 45: Right-Wing Authoritarianism Voting Preferences

	2016 [Trump vs. Clinton]			2016 [Trump vs. Clinton] + Supporters			2012 [Romney vs. Obama]			2008 [McCain vs. Obama]
Predictors	Log-Odds	CI	p	Log-Odds	CI	p	Log-Odds	CI	p	Log-Odds	CI	p
(Intercept)	.157	-Inf – Inf	.042	.109	-Inf – Inf	.143	.271	-Inf – Inf	<.001	.288	-Inf – Inf	<.001
Right-Wing Authoritarianism	-1.866	-Inf – Inf	<.001	-1.790	-Inf – Inf	<.001	-1.478	-Inf – Inf	<.001	-1.331	-Inf – Inf	<.001
Observations	1103			1148			1236			1206
R² Tjur	.381			.362			.280			.248

4.7 Voting & Party Identity

Table 46: Right-Wing Authoritarianism and Party Identity & Voting

	Donald Trump	Hilary Clinton
Strong Republican	282	7
Republican	166	24
Leaning Republican	58	7
Independent	17	16
Leaning Democrat	10	65
Democrat	27	129
Strong Democrat	4	323

Table 47: Aggression and Party Identity

	Donald Trump	Hilary Clinton
Strong Republican	282	7
Republican	166	24
Leaning Republican	58	7
Independent	17	16
Leaning Democrat	10	65
Democrat	27	129
Strong Democrat	4	323

Table 48: Submission and Party Identity

	Donald Trump	Hilary Clinton
Strong Republican	282	7
Republican	166	24
Leaning Republican	58	7
Independent	17	16
Leaning Democrat	10	65
Democrat	27	129
Strong Democrat	4	323

Table 49: Conventionalism and Party Identity

	Donald Trump	Hilary Clinton
Strong Republican	282	7
Republican	166	24
Leaning Republican	58	7
Independent	17	16
Leaning Democrat	10	65
Democrat	27	129
Strong Democrat	4	323

Table 50

	2016 [Clinton vs. Trump]			2016 [Trump vs. Clinton] + Supporters
Predictors	Odds Ratios	CI	p	Odds Ratios	CI	p
(Intercept)	1122.17	325.90 – 4320.62	<.001	568.31	187.48 – 1887.65	<.001
Party Identity (dichotomous)	0.01	0.01 – 0.02	<.001
Party Identity (dichotomous)	0.42	0.33 – 0.52	<.001	0.45	0.37 – 0.56	<.001
Right-Wing Authoritarianism				0.01	0.01 – 0.02	<.001
Observations	1103			1148
R² Tjur	.767			.740

	2016 [Clinton vs. Trump]			2016 [Trump vs. Clinton] + Supporters
Predictors	Odds Ratios	CI	p	Odds Ratios	CI	p
(Intercept)	643.67	221.37 – 2051.29	<.001	400.16	151.08 – 1143.57	<.001
Scr_PIDFRepublican	0.01	0.00 – 0.01	<.001
facet	0.49	0.41 – 0.58	<.001	0.52	0.44 – 0.61	<.001
PIDFRepublican				0.01	0.01 – 0.01	<.001
Observations	1103			1148
R² Tjur	.766			.740

	2016 [Clinton vs. Trump]			2016 [Trump vs. Clinton] + Supporters
Predictors	Odds Ratios	CI	p	Odds Ratios	CI	p
(Intercept)	119.95	48.06 – 318.88	<.001	77.71	33.81 – 188.36	<.001
Scr_PIDFRepublican	0.01	0.00 – 0.01	<.001
facet	0.62	0.52 – 0.75	<.001	0.66	0.56 – 0.78	<.001
PIDFRepublican				0.01	0.01 – 0.01	<.001
Observations	1103			1148
R² Tjur	.754			.727

	2016 [Clinton vs. Trump]			2016 [Trump vs. Clinton] + Supporters
Predictors	Odds Ratios	CI	p	Odds Ratios	CI	p
(Intercept)	102.11	46.13 – 242.93	<.001	67.19	32.91 – 145.31	<.001
Scr_PIDFRepublican	0.01	0.01 – 0.01	<.001
facet	0.67	0.58 – 0.76	<.001	0.70	0.61 – 0.79	<.001
PIDFRepublican				0.01	0.01 – 0.02	<.001
Observations	1103			1148
R² Tjur	.756			.729

4.8 Likeability

Note. The y-axis shows residuals after regressing the outcome on demographics (Age, Income, Education, Gender). This illustrates how much the focal construct explains beyond demographic factors.

Note. The y-axis shows residuals after regressing the outcome on demographics (Age, Income, Education, Gender). This illustrates how much the focal construct explains beyond demographic factors.

Note. The y-axis shows residuals after regressing the outcome on demographics (Age, Income, Education, Gender). This illustrates how much the focal construct explains beyond demographic factors.