The evolution of authoritarian processes: Fostering cooperation in large-scale groups

Authoritarianism, comprising conventionalism, authoritarian submission, and authoritarian aggression, is an important factor underlying prejudice and social discrimination and therefore is typically perceived as socially problematic. In contrast, our work examines adaptive features of authoritarianism. Evolutionary game theoretical considerations (e.g., biased social learning) point to authoritarian psychological processes that establish and foster group life (e.g., high levels of ingroup cooperation). First, the evolution of social learning (particularly conformist and prestige biases) leads to the establishment of local and distinct cultural groups (conventionalism). Second, local cultural rules solve coordination dilemmas by transforming these rules into normative standards against which others are evaluated (authoritarian submission). Third, the common rules within a particular culture or group are reinforced by a tendency to reward norm compliance and punish norm deviations (authoritarian aggression). Implications regarding the deduction of novel research questions as well as dealing with authoritarianism as a social problem are discussed.

The ‘Us’ in Trust: Who Trusts Northern Ireland’s Political Institutions and Actors?

This article examines levels of interest and trust among the public in relation to Northern Ireland's newly established political institutions and actors, through an analysis of the results of the 2007 Northern Ireland Life and Times Survey (NILT). It is important to reveal the specific groups of people with the highest levels of political disenchantment, particularly in the context of the longer-term stability of the Northern Ireland Assembly and Executive, since the willingness of the electorate to have faith and trust in the workability of these political institutions and in the various political actors in whose custody they lie is considered vital.

'Rule of Law and Politics of Anti-Corruption Campaigns in a Post-Authoritarian State- The Nigerian Case'

This article evaluates the anti-corruption campaign instituted in Nigeria following on the post-authoritarian transition in the country, with specific focus on political corruption. The anti-corruption campaign is being prosecuted within a context where law is as critical a factor as politics. This article examines whether the judiciary, in view of its accountability deficit, can offer legitimacy to the campaign. How has its questionable credentials impacted on its involvement in the campaign to sanitise public life? What has been the impact of the judicial role on the rule of law? These are some of the important questions this article seeks to answer. The inquiry in this article demonstrates how the guardian institution of the rule of law faces an uphill task in the performance of that role in a post-authoritarian context.