Russian Political Identity Profiles: The Role of Moral Foundations, System Justification, and Resistance to Change

Objectives. To extract profiles of Russian political identity in terms of attitude to the conservative agenda, main ideologies, political parties, and institutions among Russians, as well as to identify the connections of these profiles with moral foundations and motivation for system justification and resistance to change. Subsequent analysis showing what is consolidating and what is divisive among the participants, as well as the key dimensions along which this split takes place.Background. A simple analysis of attitudes towards individual politicians and political parties and other subjects of politics does not allow to understand the relatively stable political views of Russians. At the same time, ideological closeness or disagreement is not psychologically accidental, even among those who are poorly versed in politics. There are always some pre-political psychological variables that reflect the predisposition of people to accept certain explicit ideological preferences that are reflected in specific profiles of political identity.Study design. Cross-sectional one-sample correlation design using data from socio-psychological survey. A person-centered approach was applied in the form of latent profile analysis.Participants. There were 224 participants in study 1 and 125 participants in study 2.Measurements. Moral foundations (Graham et al., 2011), attitude toward conservative agenda (Everett, 2013), system justification (Jost, 2015), resistance to change (White et al., 2020), feelings thermometer (Converse et al., 1980).Results. The greatest differences between the profiles of the Russian political identity were observed in the positive attitude toward capitalism, free market, and freedom of speech, as well as toward the president, patriotism, monarchy, military and national security. These differences were related to support for the current Russian political course and the manifestation of loyalty to it. The differences between the profiles were more related to the binding moral foundations, while the idea of fairness was equally important for Russians with any of the profiles found.Conclusions. Authoritarian submission can be considered a key psychological foundation of the Russian political identity. On the other hand, political views are differentiated by the choice between the demand for security (stabil’nost’) or development (i.e., accepting the risks of changes for the future development, or abandoning them in favor of security, stability, predictability of the current political course).

 

1. Agadullina E.R. [et al.]. Teoriya opravdaniya sistemy: novyi vzglyad na problemu neravenstv [System Justification theory: a new perspective on the problem of inequality]. Sovremennaya zarubezhnaya psikhologiya = Modern Foreign Psychology, 2021, no. 1(10), pp. 132—141. DOI:10.17759/jmfp.2021100113 (In Russ.).
2. Alekseev S.A., Gayazova E.B., Il’yasova F.F. Politicheskaya aktivnost’ i politicheskaya identichnost’ molodezhi v sovremennykh usloviyakh [Political activity and political identity of the youth in modern conditions]. Kazanskii pedagogicheskii zhurnal = Kazan Pedagogical Journal, 2017. Vol. 124, no. 5, pp. 181—184. (In Russ.).
3. Alibegilov Sh.A. Kontseptualizatsiya ponyatiya politicheskoi identichnosti v kontekste formirovaniya tsivilizatsionnoi identichnosti Rossii [The concept of the concept of political identity in the context of the formation of civilizational identity in Russia]. Vlast’ = Power, 2016. Vol. 24, no. 11, pp. 100—105. (In Russ.).
4. Vitsentii I.V. Politicheskaya identichnost’ kak faktor politicheskoi tolerantnosti studencheskoi molodezhi [Political identity as a factor of political tolerance of student youth]. Vlast’ = Power, 2016. Vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 155—160. (In Russ.).
5. Volkov D., Goncharov S. Svodnyi Analiticheskii Otchet. Demokratiya v Rossii: ustanovki naseleniya [Consolidated Analytical Report. Democracy in Russia: attitudes of the population]. Moscow: Levada-Tsentr, 2015. 43 p. (In Russ.).
6. Grigoryev D.S. Ot patriotizma k politicheskomu totalitarizmu: rol’ kollektivnogo nartsissizma [From Patriotism to Political Totalitarianism: The Role of Collective Narcissism]. Natsional’nyi psikhologicheskii zhurnal = National Psychological Journal, 2020. Vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 48—60. (In Russ.).
7. Grigoryev D.S. Razrabotka korotkoi versii shkal iz metodiki Dzh. Dakkita: avtoritarizm pravogo tolka, orientatsiya na sotsial’noe dominirovanie, vera v opasnyi i konkurentnyi mir [Development of a short version of the dual process model scales: right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, dangerous and competitive worldviews]. Natsional’nyi psikhologicheskii zhurnal = National Psychological Journal, 2017. Vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 30—44. (In Russ.).
8. Gulevich O.A., Nevryuev A.N. Lichnostnye determinanty otnosheniya k voine kak sposobu resheniya mezhdunarodnykh konfliktov [Personal determinants of attitudes towards war as a way to resolve international conflicts]. Voprosy psikhologii = Psychology Issues, 2016, no. 3, pp. 58—68. (In Russ.).
9. Gulevich O.A. Psikhologicheskii analiz politicheskikh orientatsii. Chast’ I. Opredelenie, metody izmereniya i problemy izucheniya [Psychological analysis of political orientations. Part I. Definition, methods and problems of study]. Psikhologicheskii zhurnal = Psychological Journal, 2020. Vol. 41, no. 5, pp. 18—24. (In Russ.).
10. Gulevich O.A. Psikhologicheskii analiz politicheskikh orientatsii. Chast’ II. Prediktory i posledstviya politicheskikh vzglyadov [Psychological analysis of political orientations. Part II: Predictors and consequences of political views]. Psikhologicheskii zhurnal = Psychological Journal, 2021. Vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 46—55. (In Russ.).
11. Ivanova A.E. Politicheskaya identichnost’ rossiyan: analiz paradoksal’noi dinamiki [Political Identity of Russians: Analysis of Paradoxical Dynamics]. Vlast’ = Power, 2009, no. 2, pp. 85—89. (In Russ.).
12. Nevryuev A.N., Gulevich O.A., Nekrasova E. Vera v spravedlivyi mir, grazhdanskaya identichnost’ i sotsial’naya ustanovka po otnosheniyu k voine (na primere grazhdanskoi voiny v Cirii) [Belief in a just world, civic identity and social attitude towards war (on the example of the civil war in Syria)]. Psikhologicheskii zhurnal = Psychological journal, 2018. Vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 17—26. (In Russ.).
13. Popova O.V. Razvitie issledovanii politicheskoi identichnosti v otechestvennoi politicheskoi nauke [Development of studies of political identity in Russian political sciences]. Politicheskaya ekspertiza = Political expertise, 2013. Vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 205—219. (In Russ.).
14. SotsioDigger. Grazhdanskii aktivizm [Elektronnyi resurs] [Civil activism]. VTSIOM, 2021. Vol. 2, no. 8(2). 42 p. URL: https://profi.wciom.ru/fileadmin/file/nauka/podborka/rasshirennaya_ podborka_dannyh_wciom_032021.pdf (Accessed: 13.02.2022). (In Russ.).
15. Sychev O.A., Belousov K.I., Protasova I.N. Tsennostnye i moral’nye osnovy sotsial’no-politicheskikh vzglyadov molodezhi [Value and moral foundations of the socio-political views of youth]. Sibirskii psikhologicheskii zhurnal = Siberian Psychological Journal, 2019. Vol. 21, no. 73, pp. 60—77. (In Russ.).
16. Sychev O.A., Protasova I.N., Vlasov M.S. Moral’nye osnovaniya i namerenie uchastvovat’ v golosovanii na vyborakh prezidenta Rossii [Moral Foundations and Intention to Vote on Presidential Elections in Russia]. Sotsial’naya psikhologiya i obshchestvo = Social Psychology and Society, 2020. Vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 38—53. (In Russ.).
17. Sychev O.A., Vlasov M.S., Protasova I.N. Moral’nye osnovaniya i konservatizm kak osnova politicheskikh vzglyadov i predpochtenii molodezhi [Moral foundations and conservatism as the basis of political views and preferences of young people]. In E.S. Anichkina et al. (eds). Materialy mezhdunarodnoi nauchno-prakticheskoi konferentsii “Aktual’nye voprosy obshchei i yuridicheskoi psikhologii: obrazovanie, pravo i sotsial’nye praktiki” (g. Barnaul, 27-28 sentyabrya 2018 g.) [Proceedings of the International Scientific and Practical Conference “Actual problems of general and legal psychology: education, law and social practices”]. Barnaul: Publ. Alt. un-ta, 2018, pp. 93—97. (In Russ.).
18. American Social Attitudes Data Sourcebook, 1947-1978 / P.E. Converse, J.D. Dotson, W.J. Hoag, W.H. McGee. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1981. 392 p.
19. Batkhina A., Grigoryev D. Authoritarianism in modern Russia. Fifth Annual American Political Science Association Political Psychology Conference (Washington, DC, July 12-15 2019). Washington, DC: Georgetown University, 2019.
20. Bergman L.R., Trost K. The Person-Oriented Versus the Variable-Oriented Approach: Are They Complementary, Opposites, or Exploring Different Worlds? Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 2006. Vol. 52, no. 3, pp. 601—632.
21. Converse P.E. [et al]. American social attitudes data sourcebook, 1947-1978. Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press, 1980. 392 p.
22. Duckitt J., Sibley C.G. The Dual Process Motivational Model of Ideology and Prejudice. In C.G. Sibley, F.K. Barlow (eds.). The Cambridge Handbook of the Psychology of Prejudice. Cambridge University Press, 2017, pp. 188—221.
23. Everett J.A.C. The 12 Item Social and Economic Conservatism Scale (SECS). PLoS ONE, 2013, no. 12(8), pp. 1—11.
24. Federico C.M. [et al.]. Mapping the Connections between Politics and Morality: The Multiple Sociopolitical OrientationInvolved in Moral Intuition. Political Psychology, 2013. Vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 589—610.
25. Graham J. [et al.]. Mapping the moral domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2011. Vol. 101, no. 2, pp. 366—385.
26. Gulevich O. [et al.]. How do social beliefs affect political action motivation? The cases of Russia and Ukraine. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 2017. Vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 382—395.
27. Gulevich O., Sarieva I. Just world belief and the image of the perfect political leader: The role of national identification. Psychology Journal of the Higher School of Economics, 2015. Vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 30—40.
28. Hadarics M. Conservation motivation, social equality and left-right ideological preferences in Western and Eastern Europe. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 2017. Vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 336— 351.
29. Haidt J., Joseph C. Intuitive ethics: How innately prepared intuitions generate culturally variable virtues. Daedalus, 2004. Vol. 133, no. 4, pp. 55—66.
30. Jack R.E., Crivelli C., Wheatley T. Data-Driven Methods to Diversify Knowledge of Human Psychology. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2018. Vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 1—5.
31. Jost J.T. [et al.]. Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 2003. Vol. 129, no. 3, pp. 339—375.
32. Jost J.T. [et al.]. Missing in (Collective) Action. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2017. Vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 99—108.
33. Jost J.T. Resistance to change: A social psychological perspective. Social Research, 2015. Vol. 82, no. 3, pp. 607—636.
34. Post J.M. Narcissism and the Charismatic Leader-Follower Relationship. Political Psychology, 1986. Vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 675—688.
35. Prusova I.S., Gulevich O.A. The effect of mortality salience on the attitudes toward state control: The case of Russia. International Journal of Psychology, 2019. Vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 305— 314.
36. Rindskopf D. Latent Class Analysis. In Millsap R.E., Maydeu-Olivares A. (еds). The Sage Handbook of Quantitative Methods in Psychology. Sage Publications Ltd., 2009, pp. 199—216.
37. Sabucedo J.M. [et al.]. Axiological-Identitary Collective Action Model (AICAM): A new integrative perspective in the analysis of protest. PLOS ONE, 2019. Vol. 14, no. 6, pp. 1—17.
38. Sarieva I. How to measure perceived political efficacy? A three-component scale. Psychology Journal of the Higher School of Economics, 2018. Vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 477—490.
39. Strupp-Levitsky M. [et al.]. Moral “foundations” as the product of motivated social cognition: Empathy and other psychological underpinnings of ideological divergence in “individualizing” and “binding” concerns. PLOS ONE, 2020. Vol. 15, no. 11, pp. 1—19.
40. White K.R.G. [et al.]. The Resistance to Change-Beliefs Scale: Validation of a New Measure of Conservative Ideology. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2020. Vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 20—35.
41. Willis G.B. Cognitive interviewing: a tool for improving questionnaire design. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publ, 2005. 335 p.