Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Jul 31;15(7):e0236627.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0236627. eCollection 2020.

Rediscovering Tomkins' polarity theory: Humanism, normativism, and the psychological basis of left-right ideological conflict in the U.S. and Sweden

Artur Nilsson  1   2 , John T Jost  3
Affiliations

Rediscovering Tomkins' polarity theory: Humanism, normativism, and the psychological basis of left-right ideological conflict in the U.S. and Sweden

Artur Nilsson et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

According to Silvan Tomkins' polarity theory, ideological thought is universally structured by a clash between two opposing worldviews. On the left, a humanistic worldview seeks to uphold the intrinsic value of the person; on the right, a normative worldview holds that human worth is contingent upon conformity to rules. In this article, we situate humanism and normativism within the context of contemporary models of political ideology as a function of motivated social cognition, beliefs about the social world, and personality traits. In four studies conducted in the U.S. and Sweden, normativism was robustly associated with rightist (or conservative) self-placement; conservative issue preferences; resistance to change and acceptance of inequality; right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation; system justification and its underlying epistemic and existential motives to reduce uncertainty and threat; and a lack of openness, emotionality, and honesty-humility. Humanism exhibited the opposite relations to most of these constructs, but it was largely unrelated to epistemic and existential needs. Humanism was strongly associated with preferences for equality, openness to change, and low levels of authoritarianism, social dominance, and general and economic system justification. We conclude that polarity theory possesses considerable potential to explain how conflicts between worldviews shape contemporary politics.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Structural equation model (standardized solution) of associations between humanist and normativist worldviews and the model of ideology as motivated social cognition in Study 1.
# p < .10, * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001 (dotted lines represent non-significant estimates). Disturbances and factor loadings are not shown.
Fig 2
Fig 2. Structural equation model (standardized solution) of associations between humanist and normativist worldviews and constructs representing the dual process model of ideology in Study 1.
# p < .10, * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001 (dotted lines represent non-significant estimates). Disturbances and factor loadings are not shown.
Fig 3
Fig 3. Structural equation model (standardized solution) of associations between humanist and normativist worldviews and the model of ideology as motivated social cognition in Study 2.
# p < .10, * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001 (dotted lines represent non-significant estimates). Disturbances and factor loadings are not shown.
Fig 4
Fig 4. Structural equation model (standardized solution) of associations between humanist and normativist worldviews and constructs representing the dual process model of ideology in Study 2.
# p < .10, * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001 (dotted lines represent non-significant estimates). Disturbances and factor loadings are not shown.
Fig 5
Fig 5. Structural equation model (standardized solution) of associations between humanist and normativist worldviews and constructs representing the dual process model of ideology in Study 3.
# p < .10, * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001 (dotted lines represent non-significant estimates). Disturbances and factor loadings are not shown.
Fig 6
Fig 6. Structural equation model (standardized solution) incorporating the HEXACO traits and the model of ideology as social cognition in Study 4.
# p < .10, * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001. Disturbances and factor loadings are not shown. Non-significant paths are omitted with the exception of the path from resistance to change to ideological self-placement.
Fig 7
Fig 7. Structural equation model (standardized solution) of associations between humanist and normativist worldviews and the model of ideology as motivated social cognition in Study 4.
# p < .10, * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001 (dotted lines represent non-significant estimates). Disturbances and factor loadings are not shown.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Tomkins SS. Left and right: A basic dimension of ideology and personality In: White RW, editor. The study of lives. New York: Atherton Press; 1963. p. 388–411. 10.1037/12238-017 - DOI
    1. Caprara GV, Vecchione M. Personalizing politics and realizing democracy New York: Oxford University Press; 2017.
    1. Johnston CD, Lavine HG, Federico CM. Open versus closed: Personality, identity, and the politics of redistribution New York: Cambridge University Press; 2017.
    1. Jost JT. The end of the end of ideology. Am Psych. 2006; 61: 651–70. 10.1037/0003-066X.61.7.651 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Mondak JJ. Personality and the foundations of political behavior New York: Cambridge University Press; 2010.

Publication types