{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.026586620926243566, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007718696397941681, 'mean_word_length': 5.864705882352941, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Social dominance orientation, fear of terrorism and support for counter-terrorism policies

ABSTRACT Following September 11 and the subsequent heightened fear of terrorism from more recent events, this study examines the role of Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) in explaining individuals’ support for counter-terrorism policies that infringe individual liberties in pursuit of defending community security. Three hypotheses are proposed: (1) that SDO positively predicts support for ‘defensive’ counter-terrorism policies such as the maintenance of strong border protection; (2) that SDO positively predicts fear of terrorism and fear of Islamic extremism; (3) that the relationship between SDO and support for defensive policies is mediated by fear. The hypotheses are tested on a sample of 1200 Australian adults, with support found for each hypothesis. Counter-terrorism policies commonly encounter trade-offs between community-wide security and individual-level liberties; pursuit of optimal security tends to require infringement of those liberties. This research demonstrates that high SDO citizens will support such policies, particularly as fear increases.