Right-Wing Authoritarianism and Social Dominance Orientation as Predictors of Voting Behavior: A Systematic Literature Review

Despite decades of research linking both Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) to conservative political preferences, it remains unclear whether these two constructs predict voting through the same psychological mechanisms or through distinct routes. This review examines how RWA and SDO predict voting behavior across 13 empirical studies. Based on Duckitt and Sibley’s (2009) differential moderation hypothesis, the expectation was that RWA’s effect would depend on perceived threat, weakening when threat is absent, while SDO’s would remain stable regardless. The prediction held for RWA but not consistently for SDO: RWA operates primarily through threat-related attitudes, with its effect on vote choice disappearing in several studies once attitudes toward immigration and social order are accounted for, while SDO’s relationship with threat is more mixed, just as fully absorbed by threat as RWA’s in several studies. The clearest pattern to emerge from reviewing the literature is that the two constructs predict different types of right-wing parties, converging only at the far-right end of the political spectrum. Taken together, these findings support the core claim of Duckitt's (2001) dual-process model: RWA and SDO are not interchangeable, and treating them as such obscures two distinct psychological routes into right-wing politics.