This research was aimed at examining just-world beliefs, system justification, authoritarianism, and cognitive style in a nationally representative sample (N = 1000) in Hungary, and at relating these phenomena to various demographic and political variables to find out whether the findings in Hungary would differ from its Western counterparts. According to system justification theory, there is a psychological motive to defend and justify the status quo. This theory has been tested several times in North American and Western European samples. The core finding of our study was that Hungarian people, unlike people in Western democracies, did not justify the existing establishment. There was strong pessimism with regard to the idea that the system serves the interests of the people. Members of disadvantaged groups (people with low economic income and/or far right political preference) strongly rejected the system. System justification beliefs were moderately related to just world beliefs, and there was a significant relationship between some aspects of need for closure (need for order, discomfort with ambiguity, and closed-mindedness) and authoritarian beliefs. Need for cognition was only related to one aspect of need for closure: closed-mindedness. The voters of right-wing parties did not display higher levels of authoritarianism than the voters of the left social-democrat party. The role of demographic and political variables, limitations, and possible developments of this research are discussed.
The last decade has witnessed a major erosion of democratic institutions and values in Hungary, one of the most promising new democracies at the time of the collapse of communism. How can we explain this unexpected process? Is Hungary in some way different from well-established democracies? Is it the case that Hungarians, or more generally Eastern Europeans, think differently from their Western counterparts, and hold to a different set of social and political values? Do Hungarians display a tendency of “system derogation”: a motivated belief that their social and political system is inherently unfair, unjust and corrupt? Our study investigates system derogation, and the demographic and political variables associated with system derogatory beliefs. In the following, we briefly introduce the theoretical background of our research, namely the just-world hypothesis, system justification theory, and the concepts of need for closure, need for cognition, and authoritarianism.
According to the just-world hypothesis (
System justification theory (
Most of the findings about just-system beliefs come from the analyses of Western European and North American samples (
A few studies report the mean level of system justification. The general finding is that the mean level is above the response scale’s mid-point in the Western samples.
The few studies concerning the just-world hypothesis and system justification in Eastern European countries – namely, Hungary and Poland – paint a different picture. Hungarian and Polish people scored lower on just world beliefs than citizens of Western nations (
There are many possible contributing factors to the differences between Western and Eastern European countries. One factor is the unfinished transition from socialism to capitalism in Eastern European countries (
The difference in social and historical development of Western and Eastern European states and nations is another possible contributing factor. In the Western context, the nation and the state overlapped and developed in harmony with one another, whereas in the Eastern context the nation was organized against the state. The state (system) was typically led by hostile foreign oppressors such as the Ottoman Turks, the Habsburgs, the Germans, and the Soviets (
Cognitive style is the consistent pattern of acquiring and processing information (
Need for closure is the desire for “an answer on a given topic, any answer… compared to confusion and ambiguity” (
People not only differ in the extent to which they favor certain answers over uncertain ones, but also in the extent to which they prefer to participate and engage in thinking.
Need for closure is frequently associated with conservative political beliefs, authoritarianism, and dogmatism (see
However,
Authoritarian beliefs can be related to both situational and personal variables (
Dispositional need for closure is a trait-like variable that is related to authoritarian beliefs. Authoritarianism facilitates the reduction of thinking time by offering already existing answers, which take their roots in tradition, stability, and norms, and by doing so, help to obtain closure (
Authoritarianism in the Western European context also has a strong connection with conservative ideology and the preference of right-wing parties, politicians, and right-wing political beliefs (
The present research aimed to achieve two main goals. We assessed the magnitude of the relationship between just-world beliefs, system justification, need for closure, need for cognition, and authoritarianism in a nationally representative sample of 1000 Hungarian adults. Given the theoretical background of our study, a couple of questions seemed highly important: (a) whether Hungarians believe in the existence of a just world and a just system or not; (b) what is the correlation between just-world beliefs and system-justification tendencies; (c) what is the correlation between need for closure, authoritarianism, party preference and left-right self-placement, specifically whether need for closure is a content-independent motivation or it is strongly related to conservative and rightist ideologies; and (d) what is the correlation between system justification and need for closure?
A second aim of this study was to investigate how these psychological variables relate to political and demographic variables. Most importantly, we wanted to see whether disadvantaged groups in Hungary accept beliefs about a just-world and a just system, and whether there is a leftist version of authoritarianism in the Eastern European context.
The research was conducted between February and March 2010, shortly before the national elections. The two rounds of Hungarian parliamentary elections were held on 11th and 25th of April 2010.
In Hungary, the significant parties can unequivocally be linked to their political orientation which they integrate into their manifesto. In the present study, parties are referred to in accordance with those orientations; namely, MSZP as social-democrats, the coalition of two parties Fidesz-KDNP as right-wing conservatives, Jobbik as radical, far right-wing, and LMP and SZDSZ as liberals (to simplify the analysis, the two independent liberal parties, LMP and SZDSZ, were collapsed into the category of “liberal party”). At the time of the survey, a small conservative party, MDF, had a caucus too, but eventually they were unable to form a caucus in the new National Assembly.i
At the time of the survey, the social-democrat MSZP was the governing political force, the conservative party coalition Fidesz-KDNP was the major opposition party, and two smaller political parties, the liberal SZDSZ and the conservative MDF, had parliamentary caucuses. MSZP held 186 seats, Fidesz-KDNP held 164 seats, SZDSZ 18, and MDF 11.
At the election, Fidesz-KDNP won a two-thirds majority of seats, followed by MSZP in the second place far behind. The newly emerging radical right-wing party Jobbik and the liberal LMP ranked third and fourth, respectively. This means that the political situation drastically changed one month after the data recording. A right-wing government emerged, traditional “system-changing” parties like SZDSZ and MDF were unable to form caucuses, and new political forces (Jobbik and LMP) found their places in the National Assembly.
Our study was conducted with a nationally representative sample of 1,000 Hungarian adults. Data were collected over a two-month period from February 2010 to March 2010. We designed a stratified sample, applying the random walking method (see
The participants were 1,000 Hungarian adults (527 females and 473 males). The mean age of the participants was 45.4 years (
Unless otherwise indicated below, the measures used were abridged versions of previously developed measures and were translated into Hungarian by our research team. All items are shown in the Appendix in both English and Hungarian language.
Just-world beliefs were measured by an abridged version of
System justification was measured by an abridged version of
Need for closure was measured by an abridged version of the original need for closure scale developed by
In order to measure authoritarianism, six statements were used. Three items were selected from the original F-scale by
Participants were asked to indicate their political orientation on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (“extreme left”) to 7 (“extreme right”). We also asked participants to indicate their party preference by answering the following question: “Which party would you vote for if elections were held this Sunday?” Participants also indicated their age, gender, level of education, place of residence, monthly income, and subjective economic situation (see Appendix).
Before proceeding with the data analysis, confirmatory factor analysis using maximum likelihood estimation was applied in order to confirm our intended measurement model. The items were postulated to load on different latent factors, namely general just world beliefs, personal just world beliefs, just system beliefs, need for cognition, need for closure, and authoritarianism. No secondary loadings were specified. The suggested six-factor model yielded poor fit indices:
As the first step of data processing, descriptive statistics were obtained concerning our main variables.
Measure | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. General Just World Beliefs | - | .56** | .49** | -.06 | -.05 | .01 | .01 | -.05 | .02 |
2. Personal Just World Beliefs | - | .36** | .10** | .03 | .07 | .03 | -.001 | -.14** | |
3. System Justification | - | -.04 | -.19 | -.03 | .08 | -.16** | .11** | ||
4. Need for Cognition | - | -.03 | .08 | .01 | -.05 | -.47** | |||
5. Authoritarianism | - | .29** | -.11** | .31** | -.25** | ||||
6. Need for Order | - | .22** | .23** | -.27** | |||||
7. Decisiveness | - | -.01 | -.03 | ||||||
8. Discomfort with Ambiguity | - | -.16** | |||||||
9. Closed-mindedness | - | ||||||||
2.30 | 2.53 | 1.84 | 2.67 | 3.10 | 3.21 | 2.50 | 3.39 | 1.73 | |
.65 | .59 | .50 | .63 | .50 | .75 | .94 | .71 | .71 | |
α | .66 | .80 | .68 | .75 | .67 | - | - | - | - |
The descriptive results showed that the mean score on the system justification scale was lower than the midpoint of the scale. The mean level of the Hungarian sample for the item “Everyone has a fair shot at wealth and happiness” was 1.95 (
In accordance with the notion that just world beliefs and system justification partly overlap (
A series of multiple hierarchical regression analyses were conducted in order to test the relationships between our main variables and various political and demographic variables. In each regression analysis, a main variable (general belief in a just world, personal belief in a just world, just system beliefs, need for closure, the four aspects of need for cognition, and authoritarianism) was entered as the dependent variable, while the political and demographic variables were entered as predictor variables (and in some cases items which were measuring cognitive style as a third set of variables). Place of residence, party affiliation, and level of education were dummy-coded for all analyses. For party affiliation we used four dummy variables and Fidesz-KDNP was the reference category. The four dummy variables were MSZP (social-democrat party), Liberal parties (SZDSZ and LMP), Jobbik (far right-wing party), and one category for people who did not want to answer, were uncertain, chose “other party”, or did not have the intention to vote. We decided to omit the predictor variable “income” because 194 participants did not reveal this information. The inclusion of this variable in the analyses would have led to a sample of 806 participants instead of 1,000 participants. We were still able to measure our participants’ economic situation with another variable that assessed the subjective economic situation of our participants (“subjective economic situation”). Three values were created for this variable: “good subjective economic situation” (“I do not have any financial problem”, “I do not have financial problems, but I have to live within my means”), “moderate subjective economic situation” (“I can’t buy everything I want, and usually run out of money before the end of the month”), and “poor subjective economic situation” (“I have serious financial troubles”) Subjective economic situation was a dummy variable in the analyses and “poor economic situation” was used as the reference category. For age and left-right self-placement we also measured the non-linear, quadratic effects. In order to do this, both variables were centered before creating the quadratic terms.
Demographic variables (place of residence, gender, age, level of education, subjective economic situation) were entered first in the model and the political variables (political party affiliation, left-right self-placement) second. When authoritarianism was the dependent variable, we also entered need for cognition and the four items of need for closure in a third step. When system justification was the dependent variable, need for cognition, the need for closure items, and authoritarianism were all entered as predictor variables in the third step. These additional steps were intended to examine whether the impact of cognitive style on authoritarianism and the impact of authoritarianism on system justification are culture-specific or universal phenomena.
Variables | General Just World Beliefs |
Personal Just World Beliefs |
||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
β | β | |||||
(Constant) | 2.292 | .114 | 2.487 | .104 | ||
Gender | -.072 | .041 | -.056 | -.038 | .037 | -.032 |
Age Linear | -.009 | .005 | -.220 | -.010 | .004 | -.274** |
Age Quadratic | .000 | .000 | .219 | .000 | .000 | .229 |
Secondary School | .086 | .046 | .064 | .027 | .042 | .022 |
University Degree | .158 | .066 | .084* | .137 | .060 | .080* |
City with County’s Rights | -.152 | .067 | -.094* | -.094 | .061 | -.064 |
City | -.147 | .061 | -.105* | -.080 | .056 | -.062 |
Village | -.093 | .061 | -.067 | -.125 | .055 | -.099* |
Moderate Economic Situation | .210 | .070 | .160** | .280 | .064 | .233** |
Good Economic Situation | .318 | .071 | .245** | .398 | .065 | .336** |
Left-Right Self-Placement Linear | .038 | .025 | .100 | .031 | .023 | .089 |
Left-Right Self-Placement Quadratic | .001 | .015 | .004 | -.004 | .013 | -.021 |
Jobbik Voters | -.204 | .068 | -.104** | .000 | .062 | .000 |
LMP-SZDSZ Voters | -.069 | .128 | -.018 | -.124 | .117 | -.035 |
MSZP Voters | -.113 | .087 | -.051 | -.086 | .079 | -.043 |
Party Affiliation Not Known | -.046 | .050 | -.035 | -.061 | .045 | -.050 |
Model Summary |
Variables | Need for Cognition |
||
---|---|---|---|
β | |||
(Constant) | 2.243 | .103 | |
Gender | .128 | .037 | .102** |
Age Linear | .000 | .004 | -.012 |
Age Quadratic | .000 | .000 | -.094 |
Secondary School | .253 | .042 | .196** |
University Degree | .564 | .059 | .310** |
City with County’s Rights | .104 | .060 | .067 |
City | .154 | .056 | .114** |
Village | .013 | .055 | .010 |
Moderate Economic Situation | .144 | .063 | .113* |
Good Economic Situation | .156 | .065 | .125* |
Left-Right Self-Placement Linear | -.035 | .022 | -.095 |
Left-Right Self-Placement Quadratic | .010 | .013 | .047 |
Jobbik Voters | .102 | .065 | .063 |
LMP-SZDSZ Voters | .090 | .116 | .024 |
MSZP Voters | .062 | .079 | .029 |
Party Affiliation Not Known | .006 | .045 | .004 |
Model Summary |
Variables | Need for Order |
Decisiveness |
||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
β | β | |||||
(Constant) | 2.265 | .129 | 1.752 | .164 | ||
Gender | -.038 | .046 | -.025 | .054 | .059 | .029 |
Age Linear | .018 | .005 | .405** | .011 | .007 | .189** |
Age Quadratic | .000 | .000 | -.189 | .000 | .000 | -.014 |
Secondary School | .052 | .052 | .034 | .167 | .066 | .087* |
University Degree | .087 | .074 | .040 | .149 | .095 | .055 |
City with County’s Rights | .292 | .075 | .157** | .083 | .096 | .036 |
City | .177 | .069 | .109* | -.091 | .088 | -.045 |
Village | .333 | .069 | .208** | -.163 | .088 | -.081 |
Moderate Economic Situation | .150 | .079 | .099 | .300 | .101 | .158** |
Good Economic Situation | .150 | .081 | .101 | .393 | .103 | .210** |
Left-Right Self-Placement Linear | -.051 | .048 | -.103 | -.030 | .036 | -.055 |
Left-Right Self-Placement Quadratic | .049 | .017 | .185** | .021 | .021 | .065 |
Jobbik Voters | .119 | .076 | .053 | -.026 | .097 | -.009 |
LMP-SZDSZ Voters | -.090 | .145 | -.020 | -.122 | .184 | -.021 |
MSZP Voters | .019 | .099 | .007 | .088 | .125 | .028 |
Party Affiliation Not Known | .109 | .056 | .072 | .045 | .071 | .024 |
Model Summary |
Authoritarianism was predicted by level of education and cognitive style. Level of education was a negative predictor: the more educated the participant was the less he or she held authoritarian beliefs. Need for order and discomfort with ambiguity were positive predictors of authoritarianism, while decisiveness and closed mindedness were negative predictors. Political party preference was not a significant predictor: the mean level of authoritarianism score was above the mid-point of the scale for all sub-samples and very similar among people with different party affiliation (
Variables | Discomfort with Ambiguity |
Closed-mindedness |
||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
β | β | |||||
(Constant) | 3.083 | .125 | 2.074 | .125 | ||
Gender | -.052 | .045 | -.037 | .096 | .045 | .067* |
Age Linear | .003 | .005 | .069* | .000 | .005 | -.005 |
Age Quadratic | .000 | .000 | .010 | .000 | .000 | .013 |
Secondary School | -.020 | .050 | -.014 | -.080 | .050 | -.055 |
University Degree | -.072 | .072 | -.035 | -.203 | .072 | -.098** |
City with County’s Rights | .041 | .073 | .023 | -.128 | .073 | -.072 |
City | .317 | .067 | .206** | -.201 | .067 | -.131** |
Village | .230 | .067 | .152** | -.163 | .067 | -.107* |
Moderate Economic Situation | .084 | .077 | .059 | -.217 | .077 | -.152** |
Good Economic Situation | .053 | .078 | .038 | -.243 | .078 | -.172** |
Left-Right Self-Placement Linear | .021 | .027 | .050 | -.009 | .027 | -.022 |
Left-Right Self-Placement Non-Linear | .017 | .016 | .068 | -.008 | .016 | -.030 |
Jobbik Voters | -.024 | .074 | -.011 | -.145 | .074 | -.068* |
LMP-SZDSZ Voters | -.024 | .074 | -.011 | -.077 | .140 | -.018 |
MSZP Voters | -.078 | .095 | -.032 | .272 | .095 | .113** |
Party Affiliation Not Known | -.042 | .054 | -.029 | .078 | .054 | .054 |
Model Summary |
System justification was predicted by party preference, subjective economic situation, level of education, place of residence, and cognitive style. Voters of Jobbik, the far-right political party of Hungary, displayed lower levels of system justification than voters of Fidesz-KDNP, the conservative right political party (
Variables | Authoritarianism |
System Justification |
||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
β | β | |||||
(Constant) | 2.812 | .156 | 2.375 | .192 | ||
Gender | .017 | .029 | .017 | -.032 | .031 | -.032 |
Age Linear | -.003 | .003 | -.102 | -.004 | .004 | -.104 |
Age Quadratic | .000 | .000 | .177 | .000 | .000 | .155 |
Secondary School | -.060 | .033 | -.058 | .030 | .035 | .029 |
University Degree | -.118 | .048 | -.081* | .124 | .052 | .085* |
City with County’s Rights | -.061 | .047 | -.049 | -.091 | .050 | -.073 |
City | .028 | .044 | .026 | -.059 | .047 | -.054 |
Village | -.024 | .043 | -.023 | -.093 | .046 | -.086* |
Moderate Economic Situation | -.033 | .049 | -.032 | .138 | .053 | .136** |
Good Economic Situation | -.029 | .051 | -.029 | .292 | .054 | .291** |
Left-Right Self-Placement Linear | -.033 | .017 | -.032 | .019 | .019 | .065 |
Left-Right Self-Placement Non-Linear | .021 | .010 | .117* | -.013 | .011 | -.075 |
Jobbik Voters | .073 | .047 | .048 | -.128 | .051 | -.084* |
LMP-SZDSZ Voters | -.001 | .089 | -.000 | .059 | .095 | .019 |
MSZP Voters | .015 | .061 | .009 | .116 | .065 | .068 |
Party Affiliation Not Known | .039 | .035 | .038 | .013 | .037 | .012 |
Need for Cognition | -.076 | .028 | -.095** | -.041 | .030 | -.052 |
Need for Order | .142 | .021 | .212** | .038 | .023 | .057 |
Decisiveness | -.086 | .016 | -.162** | .011 | .017 | .020 |
Discomfort with Ambiguity | .145 | .021 | .205** | -.081 | .023 | -.115** |
Closed-Mindedness | -.155 | .024 | -.219** | .044 | .026 | .062 |
Authoritarianism | - | - | - | -.072 | .038 | -.087 |
Model Summary |
The main objective of this study was to investigate the relationship between psychological variables (general and personal just world beliefs, just system beliefs, need for cognition, need for closure, and authoritarianism) and also their relationship with various political and demographic variables in a post-socialist context. Political sociology and political psychology have always been open to the possibility that some phenomena might function differently in different cultures (
The core finding of this study is that Hungarian people in general do not justify the current establishment. This result is in conflict with both the original version of system justification (all social groups participate in system justification in one way or another) and the “stronger” version of the theory (due to cognitive dissonance, the most disadvantaged groups justify the system the most;
It seems that system justification is considerably weaker in Hungary than in its Western counterparts: in Western European and North American samples the mean level of system justification is usually significantly higher than the mid-point of the scale (e.g.,
Given the descriptive nature of the data, one can only speculate about the possible explanations underlying the lack of system justification in this representative Hungarian sample. One not too distant explanation relates to the time frame of our study: the data were collected shortly before the national parliamentary elections so the system was in a period of possible change. However, we believe that this possibility can only offer a limited explanation for our results. First, statements regarding system justification did not directly focus on the current government, but were related to the perceived justness of general social conditions in Hungary that might be understood in the framework of a relatively new democratic system in the specific political context. Second, the upcoming elections cannot explain the fact that supporters of the governing party did not justify the system either (voters of MSZP, the ruling party, had a significantly lower score than the mid-point of the scale). Furthermore, the findings are in harmony with the results of the few surveys from Eastern/Central European countries concerning system justification, and to our knowledge, these studies were not conducted prior to national elections. Based on our findings and on the findings of
We believe that even the above-mentioned reason is only a partial explanation for the almost total lack of system justification in the representative Hungarian sample, which included young people who did not undergo socialization in the communist era. These young people did not justify the system more than older respondents as age was not a significant predictor of holding just-system beliefs. So to arrive at a fuller explanation, one has to turn to the historical trajectory of the Hungarian group and to the collective identity based on this historical trajectory (
The mean level of authoritarianism was quite high in the overall sample. Older and less educated participants had higher authoritarianism scores compared to younger and more educated participants. As predicted, cognitive style and left-right self-placement were significant predictors of authoritarian beliefs. Need for cognition (preference to engage in thinking) was a significant predictor of authoritarianism, while different aspects of need for closure related differently to authoritarianism: need for order and discomfort with ambiguity were positive predictors, while decisiveness and closed-mindedness were negative predictors. People who do not like to engage in thinking, prefer an unambiguous and structured way of life, and have difficulties of decision making were more likely to have authoritarian beliefs. This result is in accordance with the findings of Western samples (
Another goal of the study was to examine the relationship between two dimensions of cognitive style (need for closure and need for cognition). Similarly to the results in Western samples (
In addition to these findings, the study also provided insight into the relationships between psychological variables and various demographic and political variables. Economic situation, level of education, and place of residence were the most important predictors of the phenomena investigated. Participants who considered themselves in a bad economic situation believed in a just world and just system to a lesser extent than other participants. Bad economic situation was also negatively related to need for cognition, and positively to closed-mindedness. Levels of education predicted significantly many aspects of cognitive style (need for cognition, decisiveness, closed-mindedness). Place of residence was a significant predictor for all variables except authoritarianism. Age played an important role in having need for closure and authoritarian beliefs: older participants tended to show higher need for order, decisiveness, and discomfort with ambiguity, and they were more likely to agree with authoritarian statements than younger participants. Most of these results are in harmony with the results obtained previously in Western samples.
The main limitation of the present study is that it used a cross-national survey design, which can observe only correlations and does not tell much about causal effects. Therefore one should be cautious with any hypothesis about a possible causal link between the measured variables (e.g., between cognitive style and authoritarianism). An additional limitation relates to the weaknesses of the measurement model: three scales in our study had low reliability, and the items of need for closure did not form a coherent factor. Also the items which assessed authoritarian beliefs should be revised in subsequent studies, and we should use more common measures of authoritarianism such as the RWA (
In sum, our results support the notion that cultural universalism and cultural differences emerge simultaneously when it comes to psychological variables such as just-world beliefs, system justification, need for cognition, need for closure, and authoritarianism. Many of our findings are similar to findings obtained in Western samples. However, notable cultural differences were found as well. Most importantly, Hungarians hold just-world and just-system beliefs to a lesser extent than people living in Western democracies. Our stratified nationally representative sample can be characterized by “system derogation” and not “system justification”: the belief that the social and political system is inherently unfair, unjust, and corrupt.
The participants were 1,000 Hungarian adults (527 females and 473 males). The mean age of the participants was 45.4 years (
Budapest, the capital of Hungary (
City with county’s rights (
City (
Village (
Less than 8 years of education (
Finished primary school (
Finished secondary school (
Finished college (
Finished university (
I do not have any financial problem (
I do not have financial problems, but I have to live within my means (
I can’t buy everything I want, and usually run out of money before the end of the month (
I have serious financial troubles (
Less than 50,000 Hungarian Forints (HUF) per months (approximately 167 EUROS) (
Between 50,001 HUF and 200,000 HUF per months (
More than 200,001 HUF per months (approximately 667 EUROS) (
I do not know / I do not want to answer (
Fidesz, conservative right party (
Jobbik, far-right party (
LMP, liberal party (
MDF, conservative right party (
MSZP, social democrat party (
SZDSZ, liberal party (
Other party (
Do not want to answer (
Do not know (uncertain) (
Will not vote (
I think basically the world is a just place / Azt gondolom, hogy a világ alapvetően egy igazságos hely.
I believe that, by and large, people get what they deserve / Az emberek az életben általában azt kapják, amit megérdemelnek.
I am confident that justice always prevails over injustice / Biztos vagyok benne, hogy az igazság mindig győzedelmeskedik az igazságtalanság fölött.
I firmly believe that injustices in all areas of life are the exception rather than the rule / Szilárd meggyőződésem, hogy az igazságtalanságok az élet minden területén inkább kivételnek, mintsem általánosnak számítanak. (excluded item)
I believe that I usually get what I deserve / Általában azt kapom, amit megérdemlek.
I think that important decisions that are made concerning me are usually just / A velem kapcsolatban hozott fontos döntések általában igazságosak.
In my life injustice is the exception rather than the rule / Az életben velem történő igazságtalanságok inkább kivételnek, mintsem általánosnak számítanak.
I believe that most of the things that happen in my life are fair / A legtöbb dolog, ami az életemben velem történik helyénvaló.
In general, I find society to be fair / Úgy gondolom, hogy a magyar társadalom tisztességes.
Hungarian society needs to be radically restructured / A magyar gazdasági és társadalmi szerkezetet gyökeresen át kellene alakítani.
Most policies serve the greater good / A legtöbb hazai politikai döntés a közjót szolgálja.
Everyone has a fair shot at wealth and happiness / Magyarországon mindenkinek megvan a lehetősége a gazdagodásra és a boldogságra.
Our society is getting worse every year / Társadalmunk állapota minden évben egyre rosszabb. (reverse-coded item)
Hungary is the best country in the world to live in / Számomra a világon legszebb hely Magyarország. (excluded item)
I try to anticipate and avoid situations where there is a change I will have to think in depth about something / Kerülöm a sok gondolkodást igénylő helyzeteket. (reverse-coded item)
The notion of thinking abstractly is appealing to me / Szeretek elvont, absztrakt módon gondolkodni.
It’s enough for me that something gets the job done, I don’t care how or why it works / Számomra elég az, ha valami működik, nem igazán foglalkoztat, hogy miért és hogyan. (reverse-coded item)
I really enjoy a task that involves coming up with new solutions to problems / Élvezem az olyan feladatokat, amelyekben új megoldásokat lehet találni egy problémára.
I usually end up deliberating about issues even when they do not affect me personally / Gyakran gondolkodom olyan problémákról is, amelyek személyesen nem érintenek engem.
I enjoy having a clear and structured mode of life / Szeretem a rendezett és világosan lefektetett szabályok szerinti életet.
I tend to put off making important decisions until the last possible moment / Gyakran az utolsó pillanatban hozok meg fontos döntéseket. (reverse-coded item)
I do not like situations that are uncertain / Nem szeretem a bizonytalan szituációkat.
When thinking about a problem, I consider as many different opinions on the issue as possible / Amikor egy problémán gondolkodom, akkor a lehetséges legtöbb megoldást számba veszem. (reverse-coded item)
Everybody has to know his or her place in life in terms of both superiority and inferiority / Az életben mindenkinek tudnia kell, hogy hol a helye, ki van felette és ki van alatta.
It is both important to know how to obey and how to command / Fontos, hogy az ember tudjon engedelmeskedni és parancsolni is, ha szükség van rá.
People can be divided into two distinct classes: the weak and the strong / Az embereket két csoportra lehet osztani: gyengékre és erősekre.
Human nature being what it is, there will always be war and conflict / Az emberi természet olyan, amilyen, ezért mindig is lesznek háborúk.
Some day it will probably be shown that astrology can explain a lot of things / Egyszer még ki fog derülni, hogy az asztrológia nagyon sok mindent megmagyaráz az életben. (excluded item)
I would rather be told what to do than come up with my own decision every time / Jobban szeretem, ha valaki megmondja, hogy mit kell tennem, mintha nekem kellene mindenről döntenem. (excluded item)
MSZP = Hungarian Socialist Party, FIDESZ = Hungarian Civic Alliance, KDNP = Christian Democratic People’s Party, JOBBIK = Jobbik, the Movement for a Better Hungary, LMP = Politics Can Be Different, SZDSZ = Alliance of Free Democrats – Hungarian Liberal Party, MDF = Hungarian Democratic Forum
Addresses of the web-sites:
Two of the authors, Zsolt Péter Szabó and János László, were partly supported by the Hungarian Scientific Research Fund – OTKA K 109009. The research by Noémi Zsuzsanna Mészáros underlying the publication was realized in the framework of the TÁMOP 4.2.4.A/ 2-11-1-2012-0001 “National Excellence Programme – Elaborating and operating an inland student and researcher personal support system convergence programme”. The project was subsidized by the European Union and co-financed by the European Social Fund.
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
The authors have no support to report.