Direct and Indirect Effects of Authoritarianism on Policy Preferences in Canada

Abstract

Authoritarianism, as a value orientation that prioritizes conformity over autonomy, is a popular explanation for political preferences and behaviour but it is misunderstood as existing only on the right; as either an all-powerful or insignificant predictor of policy preferences; and as a predisposition that is activated by threat. Our understanding of it is further hampered by a lack of research outside of the United States. I address these problems by constructing a model where authoritarian values, moderated by perceived threat, exert a direct effect on policy preferences and indirect effects through prejudice, ideology, and partisanship. Testing this model on data from the Canadian Election Study, I find evidence that authoritarianism cuts across the political spectrum; is not activated by threat, but rather has greater effects in the absence of threat; and is partially mediated by prejudice and ideology. This shines a new light on some Canadian policy debates (especially the banning of religious facial coverings) and replicates previous American findings.