Which Machines Do We Rage Against? A Comparison of Anti-establishment Views

• In Event: Media, Social Media and Conspiracy Theories

Abstract

There has been increasing attention to the role that anti-establishment views play in undermining the health of democratic society, with consequences ranging from misinformation to political violence. Research has shown that such anti-establishment orientations can at times correlate with the political ideology, but they in fact function orthogonally to the liberal-conservative spectrum and can provide more insights into problems in democratic societies than polarization alone. Research on the causes and consequences of different anti-establishments orientations has shown that not all such views are equally prevalent or normatively problematic. However, there is little research that directly compares anti-establishment orientations. Our study compares a number of anti-establishment orientations to understand how they differently construct “the establishment” and influence trust in public institutions including science and medicine, the U.S. federal government, and the news media.

To examine these relationships, we use data from an original two-wave panel survey (YouGov) of U.S. adults, fielded in December 2020 (NW1= 1500) and March 2021 (NW2= 1015). We measured several anti-expert and anti-establishment related constructs including populism, conspiratorial thinking, anti-intellectualism, perceptions of scientists as a social threat, and “do your own research” (DYOR) perceptions. We first conduct exploratory factor analyses, using principle axis-factoring with promax rotation, to examine how these anti-establishment constructs might be capturing similar or differing dimensions. Results suggest a four-factor solution, with populism, conspiratorial thinking, and DYOR perceptions as unique factors, and measures of anti-intellectualism and perceptions of scientists as a group threat composing the final factor. This is consistent with recent research suggesting that anti-expect views, in particular, may be reflective of a social identity that positions experts or expertise as an outgroup.

Next, with confirmatory factor analyses, we replicate and confirm prior research that suggests that anti-establishment orientations are orthogonal to political ideology and party affiliation in the U.S. Results from analyses using principle axis-factoring with varimax rotation suggest that all four anti-establishment orientations are distinct from traditional conceptualizations of political ideology in the U.S. Some anti-establishment orientations correlate more with political conservatism at the time of data collection than others, but each captures a dimension of anti-establishment views that are unique from conservatism, as prior research has found.

Finally, we consider who is likely to hold different anti-establishment orientations and how different anti-establishment orientations are associated with trust in public institutions over time. Initial results, using OLS regression and cross-lagged correlations, suggest that anti-intellectualism and DYOR perceptions are correlated with belief superiority and perceived opinion leadership, and are associated with decreased trust in science and medicine and more inaccurate beliefs about science over time. Conspiratorial thinking is correlated with more political cynicism and less social trust, and is associated with decreased trust in government and news media over time. Populism is correlated with more political cynicism and perceived opinion leadership, and is associated with decreased trust in government and corporate industries over time, but has no relationship to belief accuracy. DYOR perceptions and conspiratorial thinking also relate to feelings of group belonging and empowerment in social media, and increased social media usage, while populism and anti-intellectualism are not related to media use.

Overall, our results suggest that while these differing anti-establishment orientations are related, they also have important differences in terms of which entities constitute “the establishment” and the impact they may have on democratic society. For example, DYOR perceptions and conspiratorial thinking have fewer associations with variables related to politics, and instead may be facilitated or encouraged by the affordances of digital technologies, while anti-expert views may function to bolster social identities. The results also have implications for how to understand and address practical issues like misinformation, public health crisis, and the credibility of public institutions in the U.S.

Authors

• Ariel Hasell, University of Michigan

• Sedona Chinn, University of Wisconsin-Madison