When people feel their society is falling apart, they become more open to authoritarian rule. But the reason is not mainly that they feel powerless. A new set of studies finds that the sense of lost political control matters only because it breeds uncertainty, and it is that confusion about the political world that pushes people toward a “strong leader.”
The research was carried out by Jasper Neerdaels, Ali Teymoori, Christian Tröster and Niels Van Quaquebeke, with affiliations at Kühne Logistics University, the University of Greifswald, the University of Bergen and the University of Exeter. It was published online in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology on December 16, 2024 (read the paper).
From breakdown to a strong leader
Psychologists call the perception that a society’s leadership and social fabric are breaking down “anomie.” Earlier surveys linked it to support for authoritarianism, but they could not show cause and effect, and they disagreed on why the link exists.
The authors proposed a chain. Anomie makes people feel they have no political control. Repeatedly failing to influence politics leaves them uncertain about how the political world works and what it means. Authoritarianism then appeals because it promises order, meaning and guidance.
They tested this first with a representative survey of 1,504 German citizens from the 2006 German General Social Survey. People who perceived more anomie reported less political control, which went with more political uncertainty, which went with more support for authoritarianism. The indirect path was statistically significant but small, and the survey showed no direct link between anomie and authoritarianism.
Three experiments on imagined futures
To test each step causally, the team ran three preregistered online experiments with a total of 846 US participants. In each, people read a short description of the United States ten years from now and wrote a few sentences imagining that society.
In the first experiment, the high-anomie version described a society “falling apart,” with no shared moral standards and leaders seen as illegitimate. The low-anomie version described a united, cooperative country with legitimate, effective politicians.
The effect was large. On a seven-point scale, support for authoritarianism averaged 5.22 in the high-anomie group, 3.51 in the low-anomie group and 4.54 in a neutral control group. Felt lack of political control followed the same pattern, at 4.25, 2.26 and 3.68 on a five-point scale.
The second experiment showed that making people feel they had no control over government raised their political uncertainty. The third showed that a vignette describing a confusing, unpredictable political landscape raised support for authoritarianism, to 4.78 compared with 4.01 in the low-uncertainty condition.
Uncertainty, not powerlessness, does the work
The authors compared their chain with rival explanations. Models in which lack of control alone drives authoritarianism, or in which uncertainty comes before lack of control, fit the data worse. Lack of control had no direct effect on authoritarian support; it mattered only to the extent that it produced uncertainty.
That challenges a common view that people back strongmen mainly because they want someone to take charge and get things done. The authors suggest that clearer explanations of why policies are chosen, and the values behind them, might do more to counter authoritarian appeal than promises of greater citizen influence.
They note several limits. All samples were Western. The German survey found no overall link between anomie and authoritarianism, which the authors suggest may reflect Germany’s particular history. And the arrows may also run backwards: survey data hinted that authoritarian attitudes could feed perceptions of breakdown, a possible feedback loop they flag for future work.
Study Details:
- Title: When lack of control leads to uncertainty: Explaining the effect of anomie on support for authoritarianism
- Authors: Jasper Neerdaels, Ali Teymoori, Christian Tröster, Niels Van Quaquebeke
- Journal: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
- Publication Date: December 16, 2024
- DOI: 10.1037/pspi0000483