International Society of Political Psychology

Dr. Jarret Crawford

  • ISPP Member since 2007
  • The College of New Jersey

    The College of New Jersey
    2000 Pennington Rd
    Ewing, NJ 8628
    USA


Dr. Crawford at a glance

Areas of Formal Training

Psychology

Major Areas of Research and Interest

Voting Behavior / Public Opinion, Political Personality Types, Political Cognition

Languages Spoken

English

Dr. Crawford is available for media inquiries.


Recent Publications

Crawford, J. T., & Pilanski, J. M.

Political intolerance, right and left

in press, Political Psychology

Read Abstract
Research recently published in Political Psychology suggested that political intolerance is more strongly predicted by political conservatism than liberalism (Lindner & Nosek, 2009). Our findings challenge that conclusion. Participants provided intolerance judgments of several targets, and the political objective of these targets (left-wing vs. right-wing) was varied between subjects. Across seven judgments, conservatism predicted intolerance of left-wing targets, while liberalism predicted intolerance of right-wing targets. These relationships were fully mediated by perceived threat from targets. Moreover, participants were biased against directly opposing political targets: conservatives were more intolerant of a left-wing target than the opposing right-wing target (e.g., pro-gay vs. anti-gay rights activists), while liberals were more intolerant of a right-wing target than the opposing left-wing target. These findings are discussed within the context of the existing political intolerance and motivated reasoning literatures.

Crawford, J. T., & Pilanski, J. M.

The differential effects of right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation on political intolerance.

in press, Political Psychology

Read Abstract
Decades of scholarship have identified several determinants of political intolerance, including authoritarianism and normative threat. Previous attempts in the literature to associate other individual difference variables (i.e., social dominance orientation, SDO) and situational variables (i.e., outgroups’ gains in power and status) have been unsuccessful. Using a dual process motivational model (DPM) framework, in Study 1 we found that SDO predicted political intolerance, but only of groups with hierarchy-attenuating political objectives. This relationship was consistent over and above other well-known predictors of political intolerance, including right-wing authoritarianism (RWA). RWA predicted intolerance of groups with both hierarchy-attenuating and conformity-reducing objectives. In Study 2, we manipulated whether an immigrant rights group was described as presenting a normative threat or as gaining power and status. Consistent with extant findings, RWA moderated the effect of normative threat on political intolerance. More interestingly, SDO moderated the effect of gains in power and status on political intolerance. The implications of these findings are discussed.

Crawford, J. T.

The ideologically objectionable premise model: Predicting biased political judgments on the left and right

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(1), 138-151

Read Abstract
This paper introduces the ideologically objectionable premise model (IOPM), which predicts that biased political judgments will emerge on both the political left and right, but only when the premise of a judgment is not ideologically objectionable to the perceiver. The IOPM generates three hypothesized patterns of bias: biases among both those on the left and right, bias only among those on the right, and bias only among those on the left. These hypotheses were tested within the context of the dual process motivational model of ideological attitudes (DPM; Duckitt, 2001), which posits that right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO) are related but distinct ideological attitudes. Across two studies, all three IOPM hypotheses were tested and supported on the RWA ideological attitude dimension, and two of the three IOPM hypotheses were tested and supported on the SDO dimension. These findings indicate that the context of the judgment is an important determinant of whether biases emerge in political judgment.

Crawford, J. T., & Bhatia, A.

Birther nation: Political conservatism is associated with explicit and implicit beliefs that President Barack Obama is foreign.

in press, Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy

Read Abstract
Despite an abundance of evidence to the contrary, a substantial number of Americans believed that President Barack Obama was not born in the United States, even almost two years into his administration (CNN, 2010, July). Both anecdotal and polling evidence at the time suggested that Republicans and political conservatives were more likely to hold these inaccurate beliefs. This study demonstrated that across a variety of operationalizations of political orientation, both explicit and implicit beliefs that President Obama was foreign were related to political conservatism. Potential sources of these beliefs are considered.

Crawford, J. T., Jussim, L., Cain, T. R., & Cohen, F.

Right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation differentially predict biased evaluations of media reports.

in press, Journal of Applied Social Psychology

Read Abstract
This study tested the dual process motivational model (Duckitt, 2001), which posits that RWA and SDO differentially predict attitudes toward socially threatening or subordinate groups, respectively. Participants read articles on same-sex relationships and affirmative action, and evaluated the article content and the biases of the article authors. The article conclusions (i.e., pro- or anti- same-sex relationships and affirmative action) were varied between subjects. As expected, only RWA predicted evaluations of the same-sex relationships articles and authors, whereas only SDO predicted evaluations of the affirmative action articles and authors. These results extend applications of the dual process model by demonstrating that RWA and SDO differentially predict evaluations of political information that pertains to socially threatening or subordinate groups, respectively.