The end of the end of ideology

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The "end of ideology" was declared by social scientists in the aftermath of World War II. They argued that (a) ordinary citizens' political attitudes lack the kind of stability, consistency, and constraint that ideology requires; (b) ideological constructs such as liberalism and conservatism lack motivational potency and behavioral significance; (c) there are no major differences in content (or substance) between liberal and conservative points of view; and (d) there are few important differences in psychological processes (or styles) that underlie liberal versus conservative orientations. The end-of-ideologists were so influential that researchers ignored the topic of ideology for many years. However, current political realities, recent data from the American National Election Studies, and results from an emerging psychological paradigm provide strong grounds for returning to the study of ideology. Studies reveal that there are indeed meaningful political and psychological differences that covary with ideological self-placement. Situational variables - including system threat and mortality salience - and dispositional variables - including openness and conscientiousness - affect the degree to which an individual is drawn to liberal versus conservative leaders, parties, and opinions. A psychological analysis is also useful for understanding the political divide between "red states" and "blue states."

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)651-670
Number of pages20
JournalAmerican Psychologist
Volume61
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 2006

Fingerprint

Psychology
Politics
World War II
Research Personnel
Mortality

Keywords

  • Conservatism
  • Ideology
  • Liberalism
  • Political attitudes
  • Political psychology
  • Public opinion

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychology(all)

Cite this

The end of the end of ideology. / Jost, John T.

In: American Psychologist, Vol. 61, No. 7, 10.2006, p. 651-670.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Jost, John T. / The end of the end of ideology. In: American Psychologist. 2006 ; Vol. 61, No. 7. pp. 651-670.
@article{36b35f7b1b0b49dba27a187fe585dea3,
title = "The end of the end of ideology",
abstract = "The {"}end of ideology{"} was declared by social scientists in the aftermath of World War II. They argued that (a) ordinary citizens' political attitudes lack the kind of stability, consistency, and constraint that ideology requires; (b) ideological constructs such as liberalism and conservatism lack motivational potency and behavioral significance; (c) there are no major differences in content (or substance) between liberal and conservative points of view; and (d) there are few important differences in psychological processes (or styles) that underlie liberal versus conservative orientations. The end-of-ideologists were so influential that researchers ignored the topic of ideology for many years. However, current political realities, recent data from the American National Election Studies, and results from an emerging psychological paradigm provide strong grounds for returning to the study of ideology. Studies reveal that there are indeed meaningful political and psychological differences that covary with ideological self-placement. Situational variables - including system threat and mortality salience - and dispositional variables - including openness and conscientiousness - affect the degree to which an individual is drawn to liberal versus conservative leaders, parties, and opinions. A psychological analysis is also useful for understanding the political divide between {"}red states{"} and {"}blue states.{"}",
keywords = "Conservatism, Ideology, Liberalism, Political attitudes, Political psychology, Public opinion",
author = "Jost, {John T.}",
year = "2006",
month = "10",
doi = "10.1037/0003-066X.61.7.651",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "61",
pages = "651--670",
journal = "American Psychologist",
issn = "0003-066X",
publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The end of the end of ideology

AU - Jost, John T.

PY - 2006/10

Y1 - 2006/10

N2 - The "end of ideology" was declared by social scientists in the aftermath of World War II. They argued that (a) ordinary citizens' political attitudes lack the kind of stability, consistency, and constraint that ideology requires; (b) ideological constructs such as liberalism and conservatism lack motivational potency and behavioral significance; (c) there are no major differences in content (or substance) between liberal and conservative points of view; and (d) there are few important differences in psychological processes (or styles) that underlie liberal versus conservative orientations. The end-of-ideologists were so influential that researchers ignored the topic of ideology for many years. However, current political realities, recent data from the American National Election Studies, and results from an emerging psychological paradigm provide strong grounds for returning to the study of ideology. Studies reveal that there are indeed meaningful political and psychological differences that covary with ideological self-placement. Situational variables - including system threat and mortality salience - and dispositional variables - including openness and conscientiousness - affect the degree to which an individual is drawn to liberal versus conservative leaders, parties, and opinions. A psychological analysis is also useful for understanding the political divide between "red states" and "blue states."

AB - The "end of ideology" was declared by social scientists in the aftermath of World War II. They argued that (a) ordinary citizens' political attitudes lack the kind of stability, consistency, and constraint that ideology requires; (b) ideological constructs such as liberalism and conservatism lack motivational potency and behavioral significance; (c) there are no major differences in content (or substance) between liberal and conservative points of view; and (d) there are few important differences in psychological processes (or styles) that underlie liberal versus conservative orientations. The end-of-ideologists were so influential that researchers ignored the topic of ideology for many years. However, current political realities, recent data from the American National Election Studies, and results from an emerging psychological paradigm provide strong grounds for returning to the study of ideology. Studies reveal that there are indeed meaningful political and psychological differences that covary with ideological self-placement. Situational variables - including system threat and mortality salience - and dispositional variables - including openness and conscientiousness - affect the degree to which an individual is drawn to liberal versus conservative leaders, parties, and opinions. A psychological analysis is also useful for understanding the political divide between "red states" and "blue states."

KW - Conservatism

KW - Ideology

KW - Liberalism

KW - Political attitudes

KW - Political psychology

KW - Public opinion

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33749589969&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33749589969&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1037/0003-066X.61.7.651

DO - 10.1037/0003-066X.61.7.651

M3 - Article

VL - 61

SP - 651

EP - 670

JO - American Psychologist

JF - American Psychologist

SN - 0003-066X

IS - 7

ER -