Loading [a11y]/accessibility-menu.js
Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

SAĞ KANAT YETKECİLİĞİ: KAVRAMSALLAŞTIRMA, ÖLÇÜM VE TÜRKİYE’DEKİ BULGULARA DAİR SİSTEMATİK BİR DERLEME

Year 2022, , 25 - 51, 25.06.2022
https://doi.org/10.33171/10.33171/dtcfjournal.2022.62.1.2

Abstract

Sağ kanat yetkeciliği (SKY) olgusu sosyal psikoloji alanının ve özellikle de gruplar arası ilişkiler araştırmalarının en ilgi çekici konularından biri olagelmiştir. Dünya’nın çeşitli yerlerinde ve Türkiye’de yapılan araştırmalar sağ kanat yetkeciliğinin pek çok sosyopolitik tutumla ilişkili bir değişken olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Bu olgu, genel olarak geleneksellik, otoriteye boyun eğme ve toplumsal otoritenin koyduğu kuralları esneten ya da onlara uymayan kişileri cezalandırma arzusu gibi özellikleriyle tanımlanmaktadır (Altemeyer, 1996, s. 8, 1998, s. 85-86). Bu çalışma sağ kanat yetkeciliğinin kavramsallaştırılmasına, ölçülmesine ve Türkiye’deki sağ kanat yetkeciliği ile ilgili araştırmalara ilişkin sistematik bir derleme niteliği taşımaktadır. Sağ kanat yetkeciliğinin Türkiye’deki ölçümleri, Altemeyer tarafından 1996 yılında geliştirilmiş ölçeğin farklı adaptasyonlarına dayanmaktadır. Ancak gerek sağ kanat yetkeciliğinin kavramsallaştırılmasına yönelik, gerekse kullanılan ölçeklere dair dünyadaki süregelen tartışmalarla beraber Türkiye’deki ölçümlerde karşılaşılan sorunlar nedeniyle ölçeğe dair soru işaretleri bulunmaktadır. Dünyadaki tartışmalar, SKY’nin kavramsallaştırılmasına, Altemeyer’in SKY ölçeğinin alt boyutlarıyla beraber tutarlılığına, farklı ölçeklerle tutarlılığına ve kültürel geçerliliğine yapılan eleştirilerden oluşmaktadır. Ek olarak, Türkiye’de kullanılan ölçeklerde tutarlılıkla ilgili problemlerin bulunmasının yanı sıra, SKY ölçeğinin Altemeyer’ın belirttiğinin aksine tekli faktör yapısına sahip olmamasının sorun yarattığı düşünülmektedir. Ayrıca, görece uzun olan bu ölçek için daha iyi hazırlanmış bir kısa formun gerekli olduğu sonuçlarına varılabilir. Tüm bunlardan yola çıkarılarak, mevcut problemlerin giderilmesi ve de Türkiye’deki SKY alanyazınının daha sağlam temellere oturabilmesi için önemli görülen önerilerde bulunulmuştur.

Supporting Institution

-

Project Number

-

Thanks

-

References

  • Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. J. ve Sanford, R. N. (1950). The Authoritarian Personality. New York: Harper.
  • Aho, J. (2020). Revisiting authoritarianism. Critical Sociology, 46(3), 329–341. doi: 10.1177/0896920519830749
  • Akrami, N. ve Ekehammar, B. (2006). Right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation: Their roots in big-five personality factors and facets. Journal of Individual Differences, 27(3), 117–126. doi: 10.1027/1614-0001.27.3.117
  • Altemeyer, B. (1996). The Authoritarianism Specter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • Altemeyer, B. (1998). The other "authoritarian personality". Advances In Experimental Social Psychology, 30(131), 47–92. doi: 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60382-2
  • Asbrock, F., Sibley, C. G. ve Duckitt, J. (2010). Right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation and the dimensions of generalized prejudice: A longitudinal test. European Journal of Personality. doi: 10.1002/per.746
  • Avcı, N. (2014). The Investigation of Attitudes toward the Solution of Kurdish Question in Terms of Basic Human Values (Yüksek lisans tezi). Erişim adresi: http://etd.lib.metu.edu.tr/upload/12617621/index.pdf
  • Balaban, Ç. D. (2013). The roles of intergroup threat, social dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism in predicting Turks’ prejudice toward Kurds. (Yüksek lisans tezi). Erişim adresi: http://etd.lib.metu.edu.tr/upload/12616457/index.pdf
  • Brown, R. (2004). The authoritarian personality and the organization of attitudes. J.T. Jost ve J. Sidanius (Ed.), Political Psychology: Key Readings (s. 39–68) içinde. New York: Psychology Press.
  • Costello, T. H., Bowes, S. M., Stevens, S. T., Waldman, I. D., Tasimi, A., & Lilienfeld, S. O. (2021). Clarifying the structure and nature of left-wing authoritarianism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000341
  • Çağlar Akoğlu, S. (2014). Ekolojik İkilemler ve Hayvan hakları: Yetkecilik, Sosyal Baskınlık Yönelimi ve Değerler Açısından Bir İnceleme (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Erişim adresi: https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/TezGoster?key=gyLHMouPes-CvnhRcjQsKTAVwWbqND28_nrf_-L1tXHwarZ1WJH5WVt8d2lHZi79
  • Duckitt, J. (1989). Authoritarianism and group identification: A new view of an old construct. Political Psychology, 10(1), 63-84. doi: 10.2307/3791588
  • Duckitt, J. (1993). Right-wing authoritarianism among white South African students: Its measurement and correlates. The Journal of Social Psychology, 133(4), 553–563. doi: 10.1080/00224545.1993.9712181
  • Duckitt, J. (2001). A dual-process cognitive-motivational theory of ideology and prejudice. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology Volume 33, 41–113. doi: 10.1016/s0065-2601(01)80004-6
  • Duckitt, J. (2006). Differential effects of right wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation on outgroup attitudes and their mediation by threat from and competitiveness to outgroups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(5), 684–696. doi: 10.1177/0146167205284282
  • Duckitt, J. ve Bizumic, B. (2013). Multidimensionality of right-wing authoritarian attitudes: Authoritarianism-conservatism-traditionalism. Political Psychology, 34(6), 841–862. doi: 10.1111/pops.12022
  • Duckitt, J., Bizumic, B., Krauss, S. W. ve Heled, E. (2010). A tripartite approach to right-wing authoritarianism: The authoritarianism-conservatism-traditionalism model. Political Psychology, 31(5), 685–715. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2010.00781.x
  • Duckitt, J. ve Fisher, K. (2003). The impact of social threat on worldview and ideological attitudes. Political Psychology, 24(1), 199–222. doi: 10.1111/0162-895x.00322
  • Duckitt, J. ve Sibley, C. G. (2007). Right wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation and the dimensions of generalized prejudice. European Journal of Personality, 21(2), 113-130. doi: 10.1002/per.614
  • Duncan, L. E., Peterson, B. E. ve Winter, D. G. (1997). Authoritarianism and gender roles: Toward a psychological analysis of hegemonic relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23(1), 41–49. doi: 10.1177/0146167297231005
  • Duriez, B. ve van Hiel, A. (2002). The march of modern fascism. A comparison of social dominance orientation and authoritarianism. Personality and Individual Differences, 32(7), 1199–1213. doi: 10.1016/s0191-8869(01)00086-1
  • Düzgün, M. (2019). (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Gender-congruent leadership style and prejudiced personality in relation with job/leader satisfaction and trust. Erişim adresi: https://etd.lib.metu.edu.tr/upload/12624064/index.pdf
  • Ekehammar, B., Akrami, N., Gylje, M. ve Zakrisson, I. (2004). What matters most to prejudice: Big five personality, social dominance orientation, or right‐wing authoritarianism? European Journal of Personality, 18(6), 463–482. doi: 10.1002/per.526
  • Erkurt, A. (2015). Kadına Yönelik Şiddet: Çelişik Duygulu Cinsiyetçilik, Yetkecilik ve Sosyal Baskınlık Yönelimi Açısından Bir İnceleme (Yüksek lisans tezi). Erişim Adresi: https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/tezDetay.jsp?id=jamQQ7c699KLQnRdysjMaA&no=Ho9s_T5yPL6VPd9dhCgGjQ
  • Feldman, S. (2003). Enforcing social conformity: A theory of authoritarianism. Political Psychology, 24(1), 41–74. doi: 10.1111/0162-895x.00316
  • Feldman, S. ve Stenner, K. (1997). Perceived threat and authoritarianism. Political Psychology, 18(4), 741–770. doi: 10.1111/0162-895x.00077
  • Funke, F. (2005). The dimensionality of right-wing authoritarianism: Lessons from the dilemma between theory and measurement. Political Psychology, 26(2), 195–218. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2005.00415.x
  • Güldü, Ö. (2011). Sağ kanat yetkeciliği ölçeği: Uyarlama çalışması (Right-Wing Authoritarianism Scale: The Adaptation Study). Ankara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi (Ankara University Journal of Social Sciences), 2(2), 27-51. Erişim adresi: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3285142
  • Gümüş, A. ve Gömleksiz, M. (1999). Din, milliyetçilik ve otoriteryenizm: Lise ve üniversite gençliği üstüne 1945'lerden günümüze toplumlararası karşılaştırmalı bir araştırma. Eğitim-Sen Yayınları Araştırma Dizisi, 3.
  • Göregenli, M. (2010). Farklı toplumsal gruplarda Türkiye’nin Avrupa Birliği’ne girişine yönelik tutumlar (Proje No. 107K082), TÜBİTAK. Erişim adresi: https://app.trdizin.gov.tr/ara?from=1960&to=2021&database=Proje&query=TRDDocument.project_number-AND-107K082&order=score-DESC
  • Manson, J. H. (2020). Right-wing Authoritarianism, Left-wing authoritarianism, and pandemic-mitigation authoritarianism. Personality and Individual Differences, 167, 110251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110251.
  • Hasta, D. ve Karaçanta, H. (2017). Yetkecilik, Sosyal Baskınlık Yönelimi ve Siyasal Görüş. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 20(40), 23–34. https://www.psikolog.org.tr/tr/yayinlar/dergiler/1031828/tpy1301996120170000m000016.pdf
  • Hasta, D. ve Dönmez, A. (2009). Yetkecilik ve bilişsel karmaşıklık düzeyi ile siyasal ideoloji arasındaki ilişki. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 24(64), 19–29. https://bursa.psikolog.org.tr/tr/yayinlar/dergiler/1031828/tpd1300443320090000m000115.pdf
  • Halkjelsvik, T. ve Rise, J. (2014). Social dominance orientation, right-wing authoritarianism, and willingness to help addicted individuals: The role of responsibility judgments. Europe’s Journal of Psychology,10(1), 27-40. doi: 10.5964/ejop.v10i1.669
  • Hetherington, M. ve Suhay, E. (2011). Authoritarianism, threat, and Americans’ support for the war on terror. American Journal of Political Science, 55(3), 546–560. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2011.00514.x
  • Hodson, G. ve Costello, K. (2007). Interpersonal disgust, ideological orientations, and dehumanization as predictors of intergroup attitudes. Psychological Science, 18(8), 691–698. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01962.x
  • Hunsberger, B., Owusu, V. ve Duck, R. (1999). Religion and prejudice in Ghana and Canada: Religious fundamentalism, right-wing authoritarianism, and attitudes toward homosexuals and women. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 9: 181–194. doi: 10.1207/s15327582ijpr0903_2
  • Hasta, D., & Karaçanta, H. (2017). Yetkecilik, sosyal baskınlık yönelimi ve siyasal görüş. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 20(40), 23–34.
  • Lavine, H., Lodge, M. ve Freitas, K. (2005). Threat, authoritarianism, and selective exposure to information. Political Psychology, 26(2), 219–244. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2005.00416.x
  • Ludeke, S., Johnson, W. ve Bouchard, T. J. (2013). “Obedience to traditional authority:” A heritable factor underlying authoritarianism, conservatism and religiousness. Personality and Individual Differences, 55(4), 375–380. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2013.03.018
  • Manganelli Rattazzi, A. M., Bobbio, A. ve Canova, L. (2007). A short version of the right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 43(5), 1223–1234. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2007.03.013
  • Martin, J. L. (2001). The authoritarian personality, 50 years later: What questions are there for political psychology? Political Psychology, 22(1), 1–26. doi: 10.1111/0162-895x.00223
  • McColosky, H. ve Chong, D. (1985). Similarities and differences between left-wing and right-wing radicals. British Journal of Political Science, 15(3), 329-363. 10.1017/S0007123400004221
  • McCrae, R. R. ve Costa, P. T., Jr. (1999). A five-factor theory of personality. L.A. Pervin ve O.P. John (Ed.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (2. bs., s. 139–153), içinde. New York: Guilford.
  • Nicol, A. A. M. ve Rounding, K. (2013). Alienation and empathy as mediators of the relation between social dominance orientation, right-wing authoritarianism and expressions of racism and sexism. Personality and Individual Differences, 55(3), 294–299. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2013.03.009
  • Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L. M. ve Malle, B. F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 741-763. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.67.4.741
  • Reynolds, K. J., Turner, J. C., Haslam, S. A. ve Ryan, M. K. (2001). The role of personality and group factors in explaining prejudice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37(5), 427–434. doi: 10.1006/jesp.2000.1473
  • Rokeach, M. (1956). Political and religious dogmatism: An alternative to the authoritarian personality. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 70(18), 1–43. doi: 10.1037/h0093727
  • Saucier, G. (2000). Isms and the structure of social attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(2), 366–385. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.78.2.366
  • Sayılan, G. (2018). Worldviews and ideological orientations: An integration of polarity theory, dual process model, and moral foundations theory. (Doktora Tezi). Erişim adresi: http://etd.lib.metu.edu.tr/upload/12622386/index.pdf Sayılan, G., Türkoğlu, B. ve Cingöz-Ulu, B. (2020). Keeping my distance: Prejudice towards transwomen and its socio-political and moral predictors. Psychology and Sexuality, 11(1-2), 135–149. doi: 10.1080/19419899.2019.1686055
  • Sibley, C. G. ve Duckitt, J. (2008). Personality and prejudice: A meta-analysis and theoretical review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12(3), 248–279. doi: 10.1177/1088868308319226
  • Sibley, C. G. ve Duckitt, J. (2010). The ideological legitimation of the status quo: Longitudinal tests of a social dominance model. Political Psychology, 31(1), 109–137. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2009.00747.x
  • Sibley, C. G., Robertson, A. ve Wilson, M. S. (2006). Social dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism: Additive and interactive Effects. Political Psychology, 27(5), 755–768. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2006.00531.x
  • Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social Dominance An Intergroup Theory of Social Hierarchy and Oppression. Cambridge University Press.
  • Stellmacher, J. ve Petzel, T. (2005). Authoritarianism as a group phenomenon. Political Psychology, 26(2), 245–274. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2005.00417.x
  • Stone, W. F. (1980). The Myth of Left-Wing Authoritarianism. Political Psychology, 2(3/4), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.2307/3790998
  • Sönmez, B. (2014). Politik Güven: Dindarlık, Yetkecilik, Sistemi Meşrulaştırma ve Değerler Açısından Bir İnceleme (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Erişim adresi: https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/TezGoster?key=gyLHMouPes-CvnhRcjQsKfirNUgNkAVN0wMPRQ0o3euD6HDxL9bm399Fzlb659o9
  • Thomas, C. A. ve Esses, V. M. (2004). Individual differences in reactions to sexist humor. Group Processes ve Intergroup Relations, 7(1), 89–100. doi: 10.1177/1368430204039975
  • Toy Kaplan, G. (2021). Yetkeciliğin Ve Sosyal Baskınlık Yöneliminin Çevrecilikle İlişkisinde Tehdit Algısı Ve Psikolojik Mesafenin Rolü (Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi).
  • van Hiel, A., Cornelis, I., Roets, A. ve de Clercq, B. (2007). A comparison of various authoritarianism scales in Belgian Flanders. European Journal of Personality, 21(2), 149–168. doi: 10.1002/per.617
  • Vilanova, F., Milfont, T. L., Cantal, C., Koller, S. H. ve Costa, Â. B. (2020). Evidence for cultural variability in right-wing authoritarianism factor structure in a politically unstable context. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 11(5), 658–666. doi: 10.1177/1948550619882038
  • Weber, C. ve Federico, C. M. (2007). Interpersonal attachment and patterns of ideological belief. Political Psychology, 28(4), 389-416. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2007.00579.x
  • Whitley, B. E. (1999). Right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(1), 126–134. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.77.1.126
  • Wilson, M. S. ve Sibley, C. G. (2012). Social dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism: Additive and interactive effects on political conservatism. Political Psychology, 34(2), 277–284. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2012.00929.x
  • Zakrisson, I. (2005). Construction of a short version of the right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 39(5), 863-872. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2005.02.026

RIGHT-WING AUTHORITARIANISM: CONCEPTUALIZATION, MEASUREMENT AND A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF FINDINGS IN TURKEY

Year 2022, , 25 - 51, 25.06.2022
https://doi.org/10.33171/10.33171/dtcfjournal.2022.62.1.2

Abstract

Right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) is one of the most interesting topics in social psychology, especially in intergroup relations research. Studies conducted in various regions of the world and Turkey reveal that RWA is associated with various sociopolitical attitudes. This phenomenon is generally defined by traditionalism, submission to authority, and the desire to punish those who bend the rules set by social authority or do not comply (Altemeyer, 1996, p. 8, 1998, p. 85-86). This study presents a systematic review related to the conceptualization and measurement of RWA as well as the studies related to RWA in Turkey. Measurements of RWA in Turkey are based on different adaptations of the scale developed by Altemeyer in 1996. However, in addition to debates on the conceptualization of RWA and the scales used, there are question marks about the scale due to the measurement problems encountered in Turkey. The debates in the world consist of criticism related to the conceptualization of RWA, the consistency of Altemeyer's RWA scale with its sub-dimensions and with different scales, and its cultural validity. There are problems with consistency in the scales used in Turkey, and the RWA scale does not have a single factor structure, contrary to what Altemeyer suggested. In addition, it can be concluded that a better prepared short form is required for this relatively long scale. Based on all these, some critical suggestions have been made to eliminate the existing problems and put the RWA literature in Turkey on a more solid foundation.

Project Number

-

References

  • Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. J. ve Sanford, R. N. (1950). The Authoritarian Personality. New York: Harper.
  • Aho, J. (2020). Revisiting authoritarianism. Critical Sociology, 46(3), 329–341. doi: 10.1177/0896920519830749
  • Akrami, N. ve Ekehammar, B. (2006). Right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation: Their roots in big-five personality factors and facets. Journal of Individual Differences, 27(3), 117–126. doi: 10.1027/1614-0001.27.3.117
  • Altemeyer, B. (1996). The Authoritarianism Specter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • Altemeyer, B. (1998). The other "authoritarian personality". Advances In Experimental Social Psychology, 30(131), 47–92. doi: 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60382-2
  • Asbrock, F., Sibley, C. G. ve Duckitt, J. (2010). Right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation and the dimensions of generalized prejudice: A longitudinal test. European Journal of Personality. doi: 10.1002/per.746
  • Avcı, N. (2014). The Investigation of Attitudes toward the Solution of Kurdish Question in Terms of Basic Human Values (Yüksek lisans tezi). Erişim adresi: http://etd.lib.metu.edu.tr/upload/12617621/index.pdf
  • Balaban, Ç. D. (2013). The roles of intergroup threat, social dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism in predicting Turks’ prejudice toward Kurds. (Yüksek lisans tezi). Erişim adresi: http://etd.lib.metu.edu.tr/upload/12616457/index.pdf
  • Brown, R. (2004). The authoritarian personality and the organization of attitudes. J.T. Jost ve J. Sidanius (Ed.), Political Psychology: Key Readings (s. 39–68) içinde. New York: Psychology Press.
  • Costello, T. H., Bowes, S. M., Stevens, S. T., Waldman, I. D., Tasimi, A., & Lilienfeld, S. O. (2021). Clarifying the structure and nature of left-wing authoritarianism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000341
  • Çağlar Akoğlu, S. (2014). Ekolojik İkilemler ve Hayvan hakları: Yetkecilik, Sosyal Baskınlık Yönelimi ve Değerler Açısından Bir İnceleme (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Erişim adresi: https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/TezGoster?key=gyLHMouPes-CvnhRcjQsKTAVwWbqND28_nrf_-L1tXHwarZ1WJH5WVt8d2lHZi79
  • Duckitt, J. (1989). Authoritarianism and group identification: A new view of an old construct. Political Psychology, 10(1), 63-84. doi: 10.2307/3791588
  • Duckitt, J. (1993). Right-wing authoritarianism among white South African students: Its measurement and correlates. The Journal of Social Psychology, 133(4), 553–563. doi: 10.1080/00224545.1993.9712181
  • Duckitt, J. (2001). A dual-process cognitive-motivational theory of ideology and prejudice. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology Volume 33, 41–113. doi: 10.1016/s0065-2601(01)80004-6
  • Duckitt, J. (2006). Differential effects of right wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation on outgroup attitudes and their mediation by threat from and competitiveness to outgroups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(5), 684–696. doi: 10.1177/0146167205284282
  • Duckitt, J. ve Bizumic, B. (2013). Multidimensionality of right-wing authoritarian attitudes: Authoritarianism-conservatism-traditionalism. Political Psychology, 34(6), 841–862. doi: 10.1111/pops.12022
  • Duckitt, J., Bizumic, B., Krauss, S. W. ve Heled, E. (2010). A tripartite approach to right-wing authoritarianism: The authoritarianism-conservatism-traditionalism model. Political Psychology, 31(5), 685–715. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2010.00781.x
  • Duckitt, J. ve Fisher, K. (2003). The impact of social threat on worldview and ideological attitudes. Political Psychology, 24(1), 199–222. doi: 10.1111/0162-895x.00322
  • Duckitt, J. ve Sibley, C. G. (2007). Right wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation and the dimensions of generalized prejudice. European Journal of Personality, 21(2), 113-130. doi: 10.1002/per.614
  • Duncan, L. E., Peterson, B. E. ve Winter, D. G. (1997). Authoritarianism and gender roles: Toward a psychological analysis of hegemonic relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23(1), 41–49. doi: 10.1177/0146167297231005
  • Duriez, B. ve van Hiel, A. (2002). The march of modern fascism. A comparison of social dominance orientation and authoritarianism. Personality and Individual Differences, 32(7), 1199–1213. doi: 10.1016/s0191-8869(01)00086-1
  • Düzgün, M. (2019). (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Gender-congruent leadership style and prejudiced personality in relation with job/leader satisfaction and trust. Erişim adresi: https://etd.lib.metu.edu.tr/upload/12624064/index.pdf
  • Ekehammar, B., Akrami, N., Gylje, M. ve Zakrisson, I. (2004). What matters most to prejudice: Big five personality, social dominance orientation, or right‐wing authoritarianism? European Journal of Personality, 18(6), 463–482. doi: 10.1002/per.526
  • Erkurt, A. (2015). Kadına Yönelik Şiddet: Çelişik Duygulu Cinsiyetçilik, Yetkecilik ve Sosyal Baskınlık Yönelimi Açısından Bir İnceleme (Yüksek lisans tezi). Erişim Adresi: https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/tezDetay.jsp?id=jamQQ7c699KLQnRdysjMaA&no=Ho9s_T5yPL6VPd9dhCgGjQ
  • Feldman, S. (2003). Enforcing social conformity: A theory of authoritarianism. Political Psychology, 24(1), 41–74. doi: 10.1111/0162-895x.00316
  • Feldman, S. ve Stenner, K. (1997). Perceived threat and authoritarianism. Political Psychology, 18(4), 741–770. doi: 10.1111/0162-895x.00077
  • Funke, F. (2005). The dimensionality of right-wing authoritarianism: Lessons from the dilemma between theory and measurement. Political Psychology, 26(2), 195–218. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2005.00415.x
  • Güldü, Ö. (2011). Sağ kanat yetkeciliği ölçeği: Uyarlama çalışması (Right-Wing Authoritarianism Scale: The Adaptation Study). Ankara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi (Ankara University Journal of Social Sciences), 2(2), 27-51. Erişim adresi: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3285142
  • Gümüş, A. ve Gömleksiz, M. (1999). Din, milliyetçilik ve otoriteryenizm: Lise ve üniversite gençliği üstüne 1945'lerden günümüze toplumlararası karşılaştırmalı bir araştırma. Eğitim-Sen Yayınları Araştırma Dizisi, 3.
  • Göregenli, M. (2010). Farklı toplumsal gruplarda Türkiye’nin Avrupa Birliği’ne girişine yönelik tutumlar (Proje No. 107K082), TÜBİTAK. Erişim adresi: https://app.trdizin.gov.tr/ara?from=1960&to=2021&database=Proje&query=TRDDocument.project_number-AND-107K082&order=score-DESC
  • Manson, J. H. (2020). Right-wing Authoritarianism, Left-wing authoritarianism, and pandemic-mitigation authoritarianism. Personality and Individual Differences, 167, 110251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110251.
  • Hasta, D. ve Karaçanta, H. (2017). Yetkecilik, Sosyal Baskınlık Yönelimi ve Siyasal Görüş. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 20(40), 23–34. https://www.psikolog.org.tr/tr/yayinlar/dergiler/1031828/tpy1301996120170000m000016.pdf
  • Hasta, D. ve Dönmez, A. (2009). Yetkecilik ve bilişsel karmaşıklık düzeyi ile siyasal ideoloji arasındaki ilişki. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 24(64), 19–29. https://bursa.psikolog.org.tr/tr/yayinlar/dergiler/1031828/tpd1300443320090000m000115.pdf
  • Halkjelsvik, T. ve Rise, J. (2014). Social dominance orientation, right-wing authoritarianism, and willingness to help addicted individuals: The role of responsibility judgments. Europe’s Journal of Psychology,10(1), 27-40. doi: 10.5964/ejop.v10i1.669
  • Hetherington, M. ve Suhay, E. (2011). Authoritarianism, threat, and Americans’ support for the war on terror. American Journal of Political Science, 55(3), 546–560. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2011.00514.x
  • Hodson, G. ve Costello, K. (2007). Interpersonal disgust, ideological orientations, and dehumanization as predictors of intergroup attitudes. Psychological Science, 18(8), 691–698. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01962.x
  • Hunsberger, B., Owusu, V. ve Duck, R. (1999). Religion and prejudice in Ghana and Canada: Religious fundamentalism, right-wing authoritarianism, and attitudes toward homosexuals and women. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 9: 181–194. doi: 10.1207/s15327582ijpr0903_2
  • Hasta, D., & Karaçanta, H. (2017). Yetkecilik, sosyal baskınlık yönelimi ve siyasal görüş. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 20(40), 23–34.
  • Lavine, H., Lodge, M. ve Freitas, K. (2005). Threat, authoritarianism, and selective exposure to information. Political Psychology, 26(2), 219–244. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2005.00416.x
  • Ludeke, S., Johnson, W. ve Bouchard, T. J. (2013). “Obedience to traditional authority:” A heritable factor underlying authoritarianism, conservatism and religiousness. Personality and Individual Differences, 55(4), 375–380. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2013.03.018
  • Manganelli Rattazzi, A. M., Bobbio, A. ve Canova, L. (2007). A short version of the right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 43(5), 1223–1234. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2007.03.013
  • Martin, J. L. (2001). The authoritarian personality, 50 years later: What questions are there for political psychology? Political Psychology, 22(1), 1–26. doi: 10.1111/0162-895x.00223
  • McColosky, H. ve Chong, D. (1985). Similarities and differences between left-wing and right-wing radicals. British Journal of Political Science, 15(3), 329-363. 10.1017/S0007123400004221
  • McCrae, R. R. ve Costa, P. T., Jr. (1999). A five-factor theory of personality. L.A. Pervin ve O.P. John (Ed.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (2. bs., s. 139–153), içinde. New York: Guilford.
  • Nicol, A. A. M. ve Rounding, K. (2013). Alienation and empathy as mediators of the relation between social dominance orientation, right-wing authoritarianism and expressions of racism and sexism. Personality and Individual Differences, 55(3), 294–299. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2013.03.009
  • Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L. M. ve Malle, B. F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 741-763. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.67.4.741
  • Reynolds, K. J., Turner, J. C., Haslam, S. A. ve Ryan, M. K. (2001). The role of personality and group factors in explaining prejudice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37(5), 427–434. doi: 10.1006/jesp.2000.1473
  • Rokeach, M. (1956). Political and religious dogmatism: An alternative to the authoritarian personality. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 70(18), 1–43. doi: 10.1037/h0093727
  • Saucier, G. (2000). Isms and the structure of social attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(2), 366–385. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.78.2.366
  • Sayılan, G. (2018). Worldviews and ideological orientations: An integration of polarity theory, dual process model, and moral foundations theory. (Doktora Tezi). Erişim adresi: http://etd.lib.metu.edu.tr/upload/12622386/index.pdf Sayılan, G., Türkoğlu, B. ve Cingöz-Ulu, B. (2020). Keeping my distance: Prejudice towards transwomen and its socio-political and moral predictors. Psychology and Sexuality, 11(1-2), 135–149. doi: 10.1080/19419899.2019.1686055
  • Sibley, C. G. ve Duckitt, J. (2008). Personality and prejudice: A meta-analysis and theoretical review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12(3), 248–279. doi: 10.1177/1088868308319226
  • Sibley, C. G. ve Duckitt, J. (2010). The ideological legitimation of the status quo: Longitudinal tests of a social dominance model. Political Psychology, 31(1), 109–137. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2009.00747.x
  • Sibley, C. G., Robertson, A. ve Wilson, M. S. (2006). Social dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism: Additive and interactive Effects. Political Psychology, 27(5), 755–768. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2006.00531.x
  • Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social Dominance An Intergroup Theory of Social Hierarchy and Oppression. Cambridge University Press.
  • Stellmacher, J. ve Petzel, T. (2005). Authoritarianism as a group phenomenon. Political Psychology, 26(2), 245–274. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2005.00417.x
  • Stone, W. F. (1980). The Myth of Left-Wing Authoritarianism. Political Psychology, 2(3/4), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.2307/3790998
  • Sönmez, B. (2014). Politik Güven: Dindarlık, Yetkecilik, Sistemi Meşrulaştırma ve Değerler Açısından Bir İnceleme (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Erişim adresi: https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/TezGoster?key=gyLHMouPes-CvnhRcjQsKfirNUgNkAVN0wMPRQ0o3euD6HDxL9bm399Fzlb659o9
  • Thomas, C. A. ve Esses, V. M. (2004). Individual differences in reactions to sexist humor. Group Processes ve Intergroup Relations, 7(1), 89–100. doi: 10.1177/1368430204039975
  • Toy Kaplan, G. (2021). Yetkeciliğin Ve Sosyal Baskınlık Yöneliminin Çevrecilikle İlişkisinde Tehdit Algısı Ve Psikolojik Mesafenin Rolü (Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi).
  • van Hiel, A., Cornelis, I., Roets, A. ve de Clercq, B. (2007). A comparison of various authoritarianism scales in Belgian Flanders. European Journal of Personality, 21(2), 149–168. doi: 10.1002/per.617
  • Vilanova, F., Milfont, T. L., Cantal, C., Koller, S. H. ve Costa, Â. B. (2020). Evidence for cultural variability in right-wing authoritarianism factor structure in a politically unstable context. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 11(5), 658–666. doi: 10.1177/1948550619882038
  • Weber, C. ve Federico, C. M. (2007). Interpersonal attachment and patterns of ideological belief. Political Psychology, 28(4), 389-416. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2007.00579.x
  • Whitley, B. E. (1999). Right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(1), 126–134. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.77.1.126
  • Wilson, M. S. ve Sibley, C. G. (2012). Social dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism: Additive and interactive effects on political conservatism. Political Psychology, 34(2), 277–284. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2012.00929.x
  • Zakrisson, I. (2005). Construction of a short version of the right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 39(5), 863-872. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2005.02.026
There are 65 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Research Article
Authors

Meltem Düzgün This is me 0000-0003-2535-2355

Banu Cingöz-ulu 0000-0002-6501-3975

Gülden Sayılan 0000-0003-0923-1668

Project Number -
Publication Date June 25, 2022
Submission Date September 3, 2021
Published in Issue Year 2022

Cite

APA Düzgün, M., Cingöz-ulu, B., & Sayılan, G. (2022). SAĞ KANAT YETKECİLİĞİ: KAVRAMSALLAŞTIRMA, ÖLÇÜM VE TÜRKİYE’DEKİ BULGULARA DAİR SİSTEMATİK BİR DERLEME. Ankara Üniversitesi Dil Ve Tarih-Coğrafya Fakültesi Dergisi, 62(1), 25-51. https://doi.org/10.33171/10.33171/dtcfjournal.2022.62.1.2

Ankara Üniversitesi Dil ve Tarih-Coğrafya Fakültesi Dergisi - dtcfdergisi@ankara.edu.tr

Bu eser Creative Commons Atıf-GayriTicari 4.0 Uluslararası Lisansı ile lisanslanmıştır.   22455