Social Psychological Perspective: Milton Rokeach
While the original study of the Authoritarian Personality was directly aligned with psychoanalysis and the Frankfurt school, most of the work following this initial study was done by researchers and theorists who were fully aligned with an empirically-steeped tradition of social psychology—and particularly the study of attitudes and belief systems. Milton Rokeach was certainly one of the leaders of this sector of social psychology. His later work–after The Open and Closed Mind: (Rokeach, 1960)—reflects this continuing exploration of authoritarian attitudes. It also reflects an expansion in the study of beliefs and attitudes that went well beyond the study of personality—yet added some additional insights and perspectives regarding the close-minded authoritarian personality.
Specifically, Rokeach moved beyond his focus on open and closed minds to a broader reflection on (and conducted research regarding) the nature of beliefs and attitudes. He was ultimately interested in the identification of processes associated with changes in beliefs and attitudes. Rokeach first conducted a remarkable experiment in which three mental patients were brought together who all believed that they were Jesus Christ. Rokeach (1964) described how the beliefs of these three men changed over time. If we were to shift Rokeach’s attention back to the closed (authoritarian) mind, then we might bring together three people who had all devoted their lives to a specific authoritarian figure who they discover has advocated contradictory opinions regarding a critical issue.
For instance, one of our devotees would have heard the authoritarian leader indicate that he is absolutely certain that God condemns abortions and would sentence anyone to Hell who performed an abortion, had an abortion themselves or even advocated for pro-choice policies. The pronouncements of this authority about abortion are extensively documented on newsreels and in written essays and news releases.
The second devotee would have heard the same revered leader declare in no uncertain terms that abortion is fully acceptable to God. The decision to abort an unwanted fetus is assigned by God to the pregnant woman and her physician. God declares that anyone seeking to prevent a woman for having control over her own body is disobeying divine guidance and is contemned to Hell. The third “true believer” who has devoted their heart and soul to our authoritarian figure has heard this man declare that there is no God. Anyone who believes that there is a God is foolish and is to be despised—especially if they somehow associated their belief in God with some important policy regarding health and life.
What happens to these three people when they are brought together for an extended period of time. Do they eventually come to disabuse themselves of their allegiance to and belief in the integrity of the authoritarian leader’s statement and beliefs? How do they now feel about this leader? Do they hate him? And what about the person/researcher who brought the three ardent believers together. Do they hate this person even more than the “dishonesty” authority?
In his later work, Rokeach offers a general theory regarding beliefs, attitudes and values. He (Rokeach, 1976, p. 5) identifies four levels (or scope) of belief ranging from fundamental existential beliefs (regarding one’s own existence and identity) to beliefs regarding preferences and tastes. We would suggest that closed-minded (authoritarian) beliefs will inevitably reside at the highest (existential) level and at Rokeach’s second level which concerns shared beliefs about existence and identity.
