Preliminary Exploration of Personality,Values,and Political Orientation: A Mediation Study

Personality and Political Orientation

Our personality defines who we are and can, therefore, be expected to influence our political preferences (McAdams & Olson, 2010). The Five-Factor Model of Personality (FFM; McCrae & Costa, 1987) and the Big Five model (Goldberg, 1981) are the most widely used frameworks in personality research. These models categorise personality into five traits: Openness to Experience, characterised by intellectual curiosity and interest in new experiences; Conscientiousness, involving organisation and goal-oriented behaviour; Extraversion, associated with sociability and a preference for lively social settings; Agreeableness, reflecting traits of being likeable, warm, and trusting; and Neuroticism, involving emotional instability and mood fluctuations. Later, Ashton et al. expanded the Big Five model by introducing an additional factor, Honesty-Humility, which led to the HEXACO personality scale (Ashton et al., 2004). While both models share similarities in some dimensions, such as Extraversion and Conscientiousness, they also exhibit significant differences. One key distinction lies in the number of factors each model comprises. The Big Five model consists of five primary dimensions: Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness to Experience, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness (Mieda & Oshio, 2020).

On the other hand, the HEXACO model includes six domains: Honesty-Humility, Emotionality, Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, and Openness to Experience (Zhao et al., 2018). This additional factor in the HEXACO model, Honesty-Humility, captures trait variances beyond those covered by the Big Five, including sincerity, fairness, and modesty (Zhao et al., 2018). Moreover, the HEXACO model offers a different conceptualisation of certain traits compared to the Big Five. For instance, the Emotionality dimension in HEXACO is akin to Neuroticism but excludes anger and includes sentimentality, traits that are typically associated with Big Five Agreeableness (Sibley et al., 2010). HEXACO’s Emotionality focuses on sensitivity to threats and emotional dependence, whereas FFM’s Neuroticism encompasses a broader range of negative emotions, including anxiety, depression, and vulnerability. Additionally, HEXACO Agreeableness differs from its Big Five counterpart by excluding sentimentality and emphasising qualities such as forgiveness, gentleness, and patience. In contrast, in the FFM, Agreeableness encompasses a broader range of interpersonal traits, including warmth and trust (Zhao & Smillie, 2014).

Research indicates significant correlations between personality traits and political orientation (Garner & Revelle, 2025). Across various samples and contexts, Openness to Experience is positively related to liberal and left-wing ideology, while Conscientiousness is positively correlated with conservative and right-wing ideology (Furnham & Fenton-O’Creevy, 2018; Gerber et al., 2010; Huddy et al., 2023; Leone, Chirumbolo, & Desimoni, 2012; Sibley et al., 2012; Vasilopoulos & Jost, 2020; Xu et al., 2021). A meta-analysis by Sibley et al. (2012, p. 664) found that Openness to Experience (r = −.18) and Conscientiousness (r = .10) were significantly but weakly correlated with political conservatism. Carney et al. (2008, p. 825) explained these associations, stating that left-wing individuals are more driven by creativity, curiosity, and diverse experiences, whereas right-wing individuals are more motivated by self-control, adherence to norms, and rule-following.

Agreeableness and Neuroticism also exhibit consistent positive correlations with support for left-wing political parties. In other words, individuals who are more agreeable and/or more emotionally unstable tend to be more supportive of left-wing parties (Caprara et al., 2006; Furnham & Fenton-O’Creevy, 2018; Huddy et al., 2023; Mondak & Halperin, 2008; Osborne & Sibley, 2012). Research indicates mixed results regarding Extraversion and political orientation. Some studies have suggested that higher Extraversion is associated with a conservative or right-wing orientation (Caprara et al., 2006; Schoen & Schumann, 2007), whereas others have not found a significant association (Gerber et al., 2011; Leone, Chirumbolo, & Desimoni, 2012). The HEXACO trait of Honesty-Humility negatively correlates with various measures of conservatism (Chirumbolo & Leone, 2010; De Vries et al., 2022; Leone, Chirumbolo, & Desimoni, 2012). Hence, individuals with higher levels of Honesty-Humility tend to have more liberal or left-wing political orientations.

Values and Political Orientation

Personal values are general principles that help prioritise goals and identify what is significant or valuable in life (Bilsky & Schwartz, 1994). Research has consistently shown a significant relationship between values and political orientation, surpassing the influence of the five-factor model of personality traits. Caprara et al. (2006) and Roets et al. (2014) found that values can explain up to 30% more variance in political orientation than personality. While personality delineates our inherent characteristics, values form the bedrock of our attitudes and judgements, influencing but not necessarily dictating our actions (Schwartz, 1992, 2012). Schwartz (1992) categorises values into four dimensions, each with specific facets. The “Openness to Change” dimension includes Hedonism (enjoyment), Stimulation (variation), and Self-Direction (freedom). The “Conservatism” dimension encompasses Tradition, Security, and Conformity (obedience). The “Self-transcendence” dimension is defined by Universalism (tolerance) and Benevolence (helpfulness), while “Self-enhancement” includes power (control) and Achievement (success). Schwartz (2012) notes that while everyone possesses these values, their importance varies among individuals. Empirical studies indicate that individuals with a high emphasis on Self-Transcendence and Openness to change tend to align with left-wing political ideologies, whereas those prioritising Conservatism lean right (Caprara et al., 2006; Roets et al., 2014; Wu & Molden, 2023). This pattern is consistent across the liberal-conservative spectrum. Furthermore, research by Caprara et al. (2009) has explored the interplay between personality, values, and political orientation. They discovered that values mediate between personality and political orientation, suggesting that personality traits influence our values, which, in turn, shape our political leanings.

Previous studies have predominantly focused on the five-factor model of personality and its relationship with a single political dimension, typically the left-right or liberal-conservative spectrum. Often, these two spectrums are treated synonymously when both are mentioned. However, this study diverges from that approach by incorporating a six-factor model that includes an additional component of Honesty-Humility and examines the interplay of personality traits and values across both left-right and liberal-conservative dimensions. This expanded framework aims to enhance our understanding of the intricate interactions between personality, values, and political orientation.

Personal Values as a Mediator Between Personality Factors and Political Orientation

Several earlier studies have shown that personality factors are related to personal values. In one of the first studies about personality factors and values, Bilsky and Schwartz (1994) analysed the relationship between the Rokeach Value Survey (RVS) and the Freiburg Personality Inventory (FPI) by using Similarity Structure Analyses. They concluded that the findings showed “both meaningful and systematic associations of value priorities with personality variables” (Bilsky & Schwartz, 1994, p. 163; Sagiv & Schwartz, 2022). More recently, Fischer and Boer (2015) conducted a meta-analysis of correlations between Big Five traits and Schwartz’s value dimensions involving 9,935 participants from 14 countries. The results showed that Openness to Experience negatively correlated with conservation values and slightly positively with transcendence values; Extraversion and conservation values were negatively aligned; Agreeableness positively correlated with self-transcendence and negatively with self-enhancement; Conscientiousness was positively associated with conservation and negatively with openness to change; and Neuroticism showed weak and inconsistent value associations. Findings strongly supported the systematic connections between personality traits and broad value dimensions while also highlighting that those relationships are influenced by contextual factors (Fischer & Boer, 2015). The results of Fischer and Boer (2015) are in line with those of Parks-Leduc et al. (2015), who conducted a meta-analysis of 60 studies on the Five-Factor Model (FFM) of personality traits and Schwartz values. The findings indicated that Openness to Experience was positively correlated with Self-Direction, Stimulation, and Universalism, but negatively with Tradition, Conformity, and Security; Agreeableness was positively correlated with Benevolence, Universalism, Conformity, and Tradition, but negatively with Power; Extraversion was positively correlated with Stimulation, Power, Achievement, and Hedonism; Conscientiousness was positively correlated with Security, Conformity, and Achievement; Emotional Stability showed no significant relationships with values. The results highlighted systematic relationships between personality traits and basic human values while showing that traits and values are distinct constructs.

In addition to studies on the relationships between the FFM and personal values, the HEXACO personality model appears to be related to Schwartz’s value dimensions. In a study involving 1,244 participants, regression models predicting each of the 10 basic values from personality showed mean-adjusted multiple correlations of .39 for HEXACO factors excluding Honesty-Humility, .45 for all HEXACO factors, and .53 for HEXACO facets (Anglim et al., 2017). The facet-level multiple correlations were even larger (>.60) for Power, Universalism, and Cooperation (Anglim et al., 2017).

The theoretical mediation model for path analysis is presented in Figure 1. Based on earlier research about political orientation, personal values and personality factors, we can assume that both personality factors and values are related to political orientation. It can also be assumed that political orientation is more likely to depend on personality factors and values since political opinions are more likely to change than personality or personal values. In addition to these direct paths from HEXACO personality factors and Schwartz value dimensions to political orientation, the theoretical model also includes mediation effects from personality to political orientation via personal values. Based on earlier studies, it can be assumed that personal values reflect personality factors to some degree and, in turn, shape a person’s political choices and opinion formation (Caprara et al., 2009). As Bardi et al.’s (2009) longitudinal studies have shown, intraindividual changes in values can occur, and value change depends on the significance of possible life-changing events. On the other hand, the FFM personality traits exhibit high levels of stability over time, as shown in a longitudinal study by McCrae and Costa (1994). In the mediation model, therefore, the values are considered mediators between HEXACO personality factors and political orientation, while direct effects are also tested empirically.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 1.

Theoretical mediation model for the path analysis.

The present study measures political orientation separately on a left-to-right and liberal-to-conservative spectrum with two questions. The definitions of “left,”“right,”“liberal,” and “conservative” are left to the respondents. In addition to this traditional measure of political orientation, we also measured social and economic conservatism using a scale of specific statements. Social conservatism encompasses beliefs and values related to traditional social norms, moral values, and cultural practices. In contrast, economic conservatism refers to attitudes and principles concerning economic policies, fiscal responsibility, and free-market ideologies.

This study extends existing research by examining the interplay among the six-factor personality model, values, and political orientation along both left-right and liberal-conservative dimensions. The objectives include exploring how personality, values, and political orientation interact, whether values mediate the relationship between personality and political orientation, and whether personality influences political orientation through values rather than directly. This multifaceted approach provides a more comprehensive understanding of the intricate relationships between personality, values, and political orientation.

Participants and Procedure

The survey was distributed via social media and among Swedish-speaking psychology students taking introductory courses in Spring 2022. The survey was in Swedish, and all respondents needed to be fluent in Swedish. The survey was conducted entirely online and anonymously. Participants were informed of their rights to voluntary participation and the option to stop answering at any time.

The required sample size was estimated with G*Power (linear multiple regression, effect size Cohen’s f² = 0.15, p < .05, power = 0.95, number of predictors = 18) to be 213.

The sample consisted of 431 participants (mean age = 43.45 years, SD = 19.01 years), of whom 69.7% were women. Regarding marital status, 28.9% were single, 34.5% were married, 24.3% were cohabiting, and 12.3% were in a romantic relationship but living separately. Most participants (74.1%) had further education degrees (university, vocational university, community college), 21.1% had upper secondary school, and 4.2% had primary and lower secondary education.

The use of psychology students was primarily because of accessibility and feasibility within the research context, which is common in exploratory studies of this type. Although these participants may have some familiarity with psychological constructs, such exposure is unlikely to bias self-reported responses on personality, values, or political orientation. In contrast, it could facilitate better item comprehension and reduce careless responses, thereby improving data quality. Given the study’s focus on testing mediation mechanisms rather than generating population-representative estimates, a student sample was deemed appropriate.

The data was analysed using SPSS 28 and STATA 17.

Measures

Ethical Declaration

The study protocol was reviewed and approved by the Social Sciences Ethics Review Board of University of Nicosia (decision no. SSERB 00400; 20 July 2024). The study was conducted in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and the ethical principles of the Belmont Report—respect for persons, beneficence, and justice (Pritchard, 2021). The study design minimised potential risk of harm because the survey was anonymous, did not include sensitive topics, and did not target vulnerable participant groups as defined by relevant national regulations. Given this minimal-risk, anonymous design, the anticipated benefits of the research outweighed any potential risks to participants. Informed consent was obtained electronically via the online survey platform; participants first viewed an information and consent form and could proceed to the questionnaire only after providing consent. Data were collected and stored securely, and only aggregated results are reported.

Correlates of Political Orientation

Left-Right Political Orientation and Liberal-Conservative Dimensions

Descriptive statistics (mean, standard deviation, skewness, kurtosis) of the study variables are presented in Table 1. Given the rule-of-thumb that skewness and kurtosis values between −0.5 and 0.5 indicate normality, some of the study variables appeared to deviate somewhat from normality. Personal values such as Self-Direction and Benevolence, and personality dimensions Honesty-Humility and Social Conservatism, showed the most notable deviations from normality. This deviation might be due to the sample being mainly composed of young students.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

Means (M) and Standard Deviations (SD) of the Variables and Pearson Correlation Coefficients Between Four Dependent Variables and Independent Variables (1–4).

Variable	Skewness	Kurtosis	M	SD	1	2	3	4
1. Right-wing orientation	0.35	−0.26	5.27	2.30	1.00
2. Conservatism	0.38	−0.01	4.50	2.06	.37***	1.00**
3. Social conservatism	0.29	−0.60	42.57	20.98	.33***	.49***	1.00**
4. Economic Conservatism	0.48	0.07	36.49	15.91	.57**	.20***	.36***	1.00**
5. Gender a	—	—	—	—	−.09	−.07	−.16***	−.20***
6. Age	0.35	−1.17	43.45	19.01	.04	.27***	.50***	.14**
7. Power	−0.20	0.32	4.23	1.55	.29***	.16***	.11*	.22***
8. Achievement	−0.07	0.81	5.31	1.51	.21***	.04	−.02	.15**
9. Hedonism	−0.15	0.05	5.79	1.90	.02	−.24***	−.35***	.02
10. Stimulation	0.15	−0.56	6.51	1.57	.02	−.15**	−.14**	−.04
11. Self-Direction	−0.45	−1.04	7.49	1.51	.05	−.15**	−.19***	−.04
12. Universalism	−0.73	−0.41	7.57	1.60	−.42***	−.25***	−.15**	−.35***
13. Benevolence	−1.33	0.52	8.20	1.25	−.10*	−.02	.04	−.17***
14. Tradition	0.08	−0.01	4.64	1.89	.25***	.39***	.51***	.22***
15. Conformity	−0.08	0.34	5.34	1.85	.26***	.32***	.41***	.20***
16. Security	−0.03	0.51	6.13	1.67	.32***	.36***	.41***	.25***
17. Honesty-Humility	−0.55	0.22	3.77	0.63	−.06	.02	.13*	−.14**
18. Emotionality	−0.14	−0.18	3.17	0.63	−.04	−.10*	−.06	−.11*
19. Extraversion	−0.44	0.06	3.40	0.62	.12*	.09	.13**	.06
20. Agreeableness	−0.33	0.58	3.24	0.52	−.02	−.14**	−.03	−.08
21. Conscientiousness	−0.19	−0.24	3.63	0.53	.12*	.06	−.04	.01
22. Openness to Experience	−0.70	0.24	3.68	0.62	−.18***	−.16**	−.02	−.16**

a

Man = 1; Woman = 2.

*

p ≤ .05. **p ≤ .01. ***p ≤ .001.

In addition to descriptive statistics for the variables measured in the study, Table 1 presents intercorrelations and correlates for four political orientation scores (left-right, liberal-conservative, Social Conservatism, and Economic Conservatism). Table 1 shows that right-wing orientation measured with one item had a positive correlation with a one-item measure of conservatism (r = .37) as well as Social (r = .33) and Economic (r = .57) Conservatism measured with the 12-item SECS. Interestingly, political conservatism in Sweden had the strongest relationship with Social Conservatism (r = .49). At the same time, the correlation to Economic Conservatism was much weaker (r = .20). Being a conservative or liberal seems more related to values than economic preferences.

The distribution of people across the liberal-conservative and left-right dimensions is shown in Figure 2. The mean and median of left-right orientation were 4.27 and 4.00, respectively, on a scale from 0 (left) to 10 (right), indicating that the respondents were predominantly left-oriented. The mean of the liberal-conservative orientation was 3.50, and the median was 3.00, suggesting that the respondents were more inclined toward liberal than conservative values.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 2.

Scatterplot between liberal-conservative and left-right orientation.

The distribution of people by Social and Economic Conservatism is shown in Figure 3. The mean of Social Conservatism was 42.57, and the median was 42.85 on a scale from 0 (left) to 10 (right; scale 0–100), indicating the respondents were slightly more oriented to social liberalism. The mean of Economic Conservatism was 36.50, and the median was 35.50 (scale 0–100), indicating that the respondents were more inclined toward economic liberalism. In this study, “Economic Conservatism” meant the opinion that the state’s role in controlling economic activities must be limited. A paired-samples t-test showed that the Swedish respondents scored higher on social than on Economic Conservatism, t(431) = 5.92, p < .001.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 3.

Scatterplot between social conservatism and economic conservatism.

Correlations between right-wing political orientation, general conservatism, economic and Social Conservatism, gender, and age are shown in Table 1. While political orientation and conservatism had statistically non-significant relationships with gender, Social and Economic Conservatism had weak but significant positive relationships with the male gender. Age correlated positively with all measures of conservatism, so the older the respondent was, the higher their score on conservatism. The strongest relationship (r = .50) was found between Social Conservatism and age. Political conservatism did not have any statistically significant relationship with age.

Regression Models for Predicting Political Orientation and Conservatism

Four regression models were constructed to investigate predictors of political right-wing orientation, general conservatism, Social Conservatism, and Economic Conservatism. Variables were entered into the model in three steps: (a) two background variables (age, gender), (b) six HEXACO personality factors, and (c) 10 Schwartz value dimensions. The level of significance was set to p < .05. The collinearity diagnostics (criteria: tolerance values < 0.1 or VIF > 10 as indicators of multicollinearity and condition index > 15 indicating moderate multicollinearity) indicated that multicollinearity was not a problem in this dataset.

Predictors of Right-Wing Political Orientation

Table 2 presents the results of the hierarchical regression analysis for predicting right-wing political orientation. The HEXACO scales and background factors accounted for 9% of the variance in political orientation. Extraversion and Conscientiousness were positively related to right-wing orientation, whereas Openness to Experience had a negative relationship to right-wing orientation. In the third step, Schwartz values were added to the model. Schwartz values, personality and background variables accounted for 34% of the variance. In the final model, the statistically significant relationship to political orientation remained only for Extraversion. Values of Power, Self-Direction, Tradition, and Security were positively related, and Universalism was negatively associated with right-wing orientation.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 2.

Hierarchical Regression Analysis Results for the Political (Right-Wing) Orientation.

Model	B	Std. error	Beta	t	95% CI LB	95% CI UB
1. F2,376 = 2.41, r2 = .01
Gender a	−0.54	0.26	−.11	−2.06*	−1.06	−0.03
Age	0.00	0.01	.02	0.37	−0.01	0.01
2. F8,376 = 4.62***, r2 = .09
Gender a	−0.73	0.28	−.14	−2.58**	−1.28	−0.17
Age	0.01	0.01	.07	1.27	0.00	0.02
Honesty-Humility	−0.27	0.21	−.07	−1.31	−0.68	0.14
Emotionality	0.17	0.20	.05	0.84	−0.23	0.57
Extraversion	0.51	0.19	.14	2.64**	0.13	0.89
Agreeableness	−0.02	0.23	−.01	−0.10	−0.48	0.44
Conscientiousness	0.65	0.22	.15	2.92**	0.21	1.10
Openness to Experience	−0.75	0.19	−.20	−3.95***	−1.13	−0.38
3. F18,376 = 10.13***, r2 = .34
Gender a	−0.38	0.25	−.08	−1.53	−0.88	0.11
Age	0.01	0.01	.11	1.81	0.00	0.03
Honesty-Humility	−0.06	0.20	−.02	−0.29	−0.44	0.33
Emotionality	0.23	0.18	.06	1.25	−0.13	0.58
Extraversion	0.45	0.18	.12	2.58**	0.11	0.80
Agreeableness	0.22	0.21	.05	1.06	−0.19	0.63
Conscientiousness	0.28	0.20	.06	1.41	−0.11	0.68
Openness to Experience	−0.26	0.18	−.07	−1.47	−0.62	0.09
Power	0.17	0.08	.11	2.06*	0.01	0.33
Achievement	0.14	0.08	.09	1.66	−0.03	0.31
Hedonism	0.01	0.07	.01	0.14	−0.13	0.15
Stimulation	−0.09	0.08	−.06	−1.14	−0.24	0.06
Self-Direction	0.35	0.08	.23	4.29***	0.19	0.51
Universalism	−0.59	0.08	−.41	−7.78***	−0.74	−0.44
Benevolence	0.01	0.10	.01	0.12	−0.18	0.20
Tradition	0.16	0.07	.13	2.26*	0.02	0.30
Conformity	−0.06	0.07	−.05	−0.86	−0.21	0.08
Security	0.17	0.08	.12	2.25*	0.02	0.33

a

Man = 1; Woman = 2.

*

p ≤ .05. **p ≤ .01. ***p ≤ .001.

The results show that some level of Extraversion characterised a right-wing-oriented person, especially respect for tradition, national Security, independence, and the right to choose one’s path.

Predictors of General Conservatism

Table 3 presents the results of hierarchical regression analysis related to general conservatism. In the first model, age was positively and significantly associated with conservatism. Background factors explained 7% of the variance in conservatism. The variance accounted for increased to 14% when personality variables were added to the model. Age and Conscientiousness were positively related to conservatism, while Agreeableness and Openness to Experience were negatively related. The third model, including background, personality, and values factors, explained 33% of the variance in the conservatism score. Age, Tradition, and Security were positively related, and Hedonism and Universalism were negatively associated with conservatism. Personality factors lost statistical significance in the final model due to intercorrelations between independent (predictor) variables.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 3.

Hierarchical Regression Analysis Results for Conservatism.

Model	B	Std. error	Beta	t	95% CI LB	95% CI UB
1. F2,376 = 13.92***, r2 = .07
Gender a	−0.20	0.23	−.04	−0.86	−0.64	0.25
Age	0.03	0.01	.25	4.98***	0.02	0.04
2. F8,376 = 7.74***, r2 = .14
Gender a	−0.21	0.24	−.05	−0.85	−0.69	0.27
Age	0.03	0.01	.31	5.43***	0.02	0.05
Honesty-Humility	−0.15	0.18	−.05	−0.83	−0.50	0.20
Emotionality	−0.09	0.18	−.03	−0.52	−0.44	0.25
Extraversion	0.12	0.17	.04	0.72	−0.21	0.45
Agreeableness	−0.40	0.20	−.10	−1.97*	−0.79	0.00
Conscientiousness	0.53	0.19	.14	2.73**	0.15	0.91
Openness to Experience	−0.67	0.17	−.20	−4.07***	−1.00	−0.35
3. F18,376 = 9.91***, r2 = .33
Gender a	0.13	0.22	.03	0.58	−0.31	0.57
Age	0.02	0.01	.16	2.68**	0.00	0.03
Honesty-Humility	−0.12	0.17	−.04	−0.71	−0.47	0.22
Emotionality	−0.23	0.16	−.07	−1.44	−0.55	0.09
Extraversion	0.04	0.16	.01	0.26	−0.27	0.35
Agreeableness	−0.36	0.18	−.09	−1.93	−0.72	0.01
Conscientiousness	0.21	0.18	.05	1.16	−0.15	0.56
Openness to Experience	−0.31	0.16	−.09	−1.93	−0.63	0.01
Power	0.07	0.07	.05	0.96	−0.07	0.22
Achievement	0.09	0.08	.06	1.14	−0.06	0.24
Hedonism	−0.18	0.06	−.17	−2.86**	−0.31	−0.06
Stimulation	−0.06	0.07	−.05	−0.93	−0.20	0.07
Self-Direction	0.07	0.07	.05	0.90	−0.08	0.21
Universalism	−0.22	0.07	−.17	−3.28***	−0.36	−0.09
Benevolence	0.15	0.09	.09	1.73	−0.02	0.32
Tradition	0.25	0.06	.22	3.82***	0.12	0.37
Conformity	0.00	0.07	.00	−0.02	−0.13	0.13
Security	0.24	0.07	.19	3.42***	0.10	0.37

a

Man = 1; Woman = 2.

*

p ≤ .05. **p ≤ .01. ***p ≤ .001.

People scoring high in general conservatism seem older, object to a hedonistic, enjoyment-oriented life, value traditions, accept one’s place in society, and especially value national and personal safety.

Predictors of Social Conservatism

Social conservatism refers to conservative attitudes towards such social issues as religion, abortion, and marriage. In model one, age was strongly related to Social Conservatism and gender accounted for 27% of the variance in Social Conservatism. When personality factors were added to the model, the increase in variance explained was only 2% (Model 2, Table 4). Only Openness to Experience was statistically significantly related to Social Conservatism. In the final model (53% variance accounted for), age was the strongest predictor of Social Conservatism. The other significant predictors were Hedonism, which had a negative relationship with Social Conservatism and Benevolence; Tradition and Security, which had positive relationships with Social Conservatism.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 4.

Hierarchical Regression Analysis Results for Social Conservatism.

Model	B	Std. error	Beta	t	95% CI LB	95% CI UB
1. F2,376 = 69.25**, r2 = .27
Gender a	−3.51	2.06	−.08	−1.71	−7.55	0.53
Age	0.55	0.05	.50	11.17**	0.46	0.65
2. F8,376 = 21.95**, r2 = .29
Gender a	−5.02	2.26	−.11	−2.22*	−9.47	−0.57
Age	0.61	0.06	.55	10.79**	0.50	0.72
Honesty-Humility	−1.79	1.67	−.05	−1.07	−5.07	1.50
Emotionality	2.25	1.64	.07	1.37	−0.97	5.47
Extraversion	0.85	1.55	.03	0.55	−2.20	3.91
Agreeableness	0.86	1.87	.02	0.46	−2.83	4.54
Conscientiousness	2.95	1.80	.07	1.63	−0.60	6.50
Openness to Experience	−3.89	1.54	−.11	−2.53*	−6.91	−0.87
3. F18,376 = 21.95**, r2 = .53
Gender a	−1.55	1.94	−.03	−0.80	−5.36	2.26
Age	0.42	0.06	.38	7.49**	0.31	0.53
Honesty-Humility	−1.22	1.51	−.04	−0.81	−4.18	1.74
Emotionality	−0.03	1.40	.00	−0.02	−2.78	2.72
Extraversion	−0.72	1.35	−.02	−0.53	−3.38	1.94
Agreeableness	0.40	1.60	.01	0.25	−2.74	3.54
Conscientiousness	−0.49	1.55	−.01	−0.32	−3.55	2.56
Openness to Experience	−0.54	1.39	−.02	−0.39	−3.27	2.19
Power	0.83	0.64	.06	1.31	−0.42	2.09
Achievement	0.87	0.65	.06	1.34	−0.41	2.16
Hedonism	−2.27	0.55	−.20	−4.10**	−3.35	−1.18
Stimulation	0.35	0.59	.03	0.59	−0.82	1.52
Self-Direction	0.10	0.63	.01	0.16	−1.14	1.34
Universalism	−0.98	0.59	−.07	−1.67	−2.14	0.18
Benevolence	1.49	0.74	.09	2.00*	0.03	2.95
Tradition	3.08	0.56	.27	5.54**	1.99	4.17
Conformity	0.51	0.56	.04	0.90	−0.60	1.62
Security	2.55	0.60	.20	4.27**	1.38	3.73

a

Man = 1; Woman = 2.

*

p ≤ .05. **p ≤ .001.

Similarly, as with general conservatism, respondents scoring high in Social Conservatism found a hedonistic lifestyle negative but valued tradition and Security. Also, Benevolence, that is, being helpful and responsible, was valued.

Predictors of Economic Conservatism

In this study, Economic Conservatism refers to the preference for low state involvement in all economic activities, that is, opposition to high taxes, limitations on the welfare state, and state control in general. Table 5 shows that gender and age were related to Economic Conservatism and explained 5% of the variance. When personality factors were entered into the model, the explanatory power rose to 13%. Age was positively related, and gender, Honesty-Humility, and Openness to Experience were negatively associated with Economic Conservatism. The third model, including background factors, personality variables and values, explained 27% of the variance. Gender, Honesty-Humility, and Universalism were negatively associated with Economic Conservatism, while age, Hedonism, Self-Direction, Tradition, and Security were positively associated with it.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 5.

Hierarchical Regression Analysis Results for Economic Conservatism.

Model	B	Std. error	Beta	t	95% CI LB	95% CI UB
1. F2,376 = 10.43***, r2 = .05
Gender a	−6.07	1.76	−.18	−3.44***	−9.54	−2.60
Age	0.10	0.04	.12	2.36*	0.02	0.18
2. F8,376 = 6.69***, r2 = .13
Gender a	−5.95	1.89	−.17	−3.14**	−9.67	−2.23
Age	0.19	0.05	.22	3.91***	0.09	0.28
Honesty-Humility	−4.94	1.40	−.19	−3.54***	−7.68	−2.19
Emotionality	−0.02	1.37	.00	−0.01	−2.71	2.67
Extraversion	1.08	1.30	.04	0.83	−1.47	3.63
Agreeableness	−0.34	1.57	−.01	−0.22	−3.43	2.74
Conscientiousness	2.40	1.51	.08	1.59	−0.57	5.37
Openness to Experience	−4.49	1.28	−.18	−3.49***	−7.01	−1.96
3. F18,376 = 7.22***, r2 = .27
Gender a	−4.34	1.81	−.13	−2.39*	−7.91	−0.77
Age	0.23	0.05	.28	4.46***	0.13	0.34
Honesty-Humility	−3.41	1.41	−.13	−2.42*	−6.18	−0.64
Emotionality	0.21	1.31	.01	0.16	−2.36	2.78
Extraversion	0.86	1.26	.03	0.68	−1.62	3.34
Agreeableness	0.60	1.49	.02	0.40	−2.34	3.54
Conscientiousness	0.55	1.45	.02	0.37	−2.31	3.41
Openness to Experience	−2.07	1.30	−.08	−1.59	−4.63	0.48
Power	0.55	0.60	.05	0.93	−0.62	1.73
Achievement	0.52	0.61	.05	0.85	−0.68	1.72
Hedonism	1.10	0.52	.13	2.12*	0.08	2.11
Stimulation	−0.51	0.56	−.05	−0.92	−1.61	0.58
Self-Direction	1.49	0.59	.14	2.52*	0.32	2.65
Universalism	−2.81	0.55	−.28	−5.10***	−3.89	−1.73
Benevolence	−0.16	0.69	−.01	−0.23	−1.52	1.21
Tradition	1.10	0.52	.13	2.11*	0.08	2.12
Conformity	−0.49	0.53	−.06	−0.93	−1.53	0.55
Security	1.18	0.56	.12	2.10*	0.08	2.28

a

Man = 1; Woman = 2.

*

p ≤ .05. **p ≤ .01. ***p ≤ .001.

People scoring high in Economic Conservatism tend to be older, more often men, and score lower in Honesty-Humility. They value hedonistic pleasures and the possibility of making independent choices. Values such as the preservation of nature, social justice, or world peace have less importance in their lives.

Path Models Predicting Political Orientation and Liberalism-Conservatism

The regression results indicated that some, but not all, of the effects of personality on political orientation and conservatism disappeared when values were included in the model. This might suggest that values mediate the impact of personality factors on political orientation and conservatism. In this way, personality factors could be considered “distal” and values as “proximal” factors influencing political orientation and conservatism. To model the mechanisms by which personality factors relate to political orientation and conservatism, directly or via values, we constructed two path models using structural equation modelling (Figures 4 and 5).

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 4.

Path model showing the relationships between HEXACO variables, values, right-wing orientation, and general conservatism.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 5.

Path model showing the relationships between HEXACO variables, values, social conservatism, and economic conservatism.

Personal Values and Personality Factors as Correlates of Right-Wing Orientation and Conservatism

Regression analysis results showed that right-wing orientation correlated positively with Power, Self-Direction, and Security, and negatively with Universalism. In terms of personality traits, right-wing orientation was positively associated with Extraversion. In contrast, in the present sample, conservatism correlated positively with Tradition and Security but negatively with Hedonism and Universalism, in line with Dimdins et al. (2023). Unlike right-wing orientation, conservatism did not maintain a significant relationship with any personality factors in this model. These results underscore that while there are overlaps, significant differences exist between conservatism and right-wing orientation in Sweden, implying that they should not be used interchangeably, as suggested by previous studies (Demel et al., 2024; Leone, Chirumbolo, & Desimoni, 2012; Leone, Desimoni, & Chirumbolo, 2012; Zettler & Hilbig, 2010).

Regarding the distinction between Social and Economic Conservatism, both positively correlate with Tradition, Security, and age. However, Social Conservatism also shows a positive correlation with Benevolence and a negative correlation with Hedonism. Economic conservatism, in contrast, correlates positively with Hedonism and Self-Direction while showing negative correlations with Honesty-Humility, Universalism, and gender. These findings highlight distinct value differences between Social and Economic Conservatism. However, it is essential to note that the individual relationships between personality factors, values, and political orientation/conservatism were relatively weak.

Our results indicate significant differences between the right-left and conservative-liberal dimensions, underscoring the importance of treating them as distinct constructs. The intercorrelations observed in our study demonstrate that while related, these dimensions are influenced by different sets of values and personality traits. For instance, Social Conservatism, which relates to attitudes towards tradition and social order, is more strongly predicted by personality and values than Economic Conservatism, which pertains to preferences for government involvement in the economy. This suggests that Economic Conservatism may be shaped by additional factors beyond personality and values alone, such as personal economic experiences and educational background.

Age and gender were related to political orientation. The results indicate that in Sweden, conservatism is more closely linked to values rather than economic preferences, a trend that intensifies with age. Consequently, as individuals age, they tend to become more conservative, suggesting a value shift over time. Additionally, the findings reveal that men tend to be more conservative than women, aligning with previous research in this field (Schlesinger & Heldman, 2001).

Personality, Values, and Their Impact on Right-Wing Orientation and Conservatism

When examining values and personality together, it becomes evident that values influence political orientation and conservatism more than personality traits. With the inclusion of values in the model, most personality effects on political orientation and conservatism diminished. While personality accounted for 8% of the variance in right-wing orientation, 7% in conservatism, 2% in Social Conservatism, and 8% in Economic Conservatism, the exact figures for value dimensions were 25%, 19%, 24%, and 14%, respectively. These findings are consistent with prior research, which typically finds that personality explains 5% to 10% of the variance and values about 16% (Caprara et al., 2006; Costello et al., 2022). The variance explained by personality traits and values was significantly higher for Social Conservatism (53%) than for Economic Conservatism (27%). This discrepancy suggests that social attitudes are more deeply rooted in individual personality traits and values. In contrast, economic attitudes may be influenced by a broader range of factors, including personal economic experiences, education, and exposure to different economic ideas. Social conservatism deals with moral values, traditions, and social order, which are closely tied to personal values and personality. In contrast, economic conservatism involves beliefs about economic policies and government intervention, which may be shaped by pragmatic, context-specific factors.

The results suggest that values might mediate the influence of personality on political orientation. This hypothesis has been previously tested with similar outcomes, though not simultaneously with right-wing, general, social, and Economic Conservatism (Caprara et al., 2009). Thus, personality factors could be considered “distal” influences, with values acting as “proximal” influences in shaping political orientation and conservatism. It should be noted, however, that mediation models based on cross-sectional data are always speculative, although they are very often used in psychological research employing a cross-sectional design (Lee & Eshleman Latimer, 2024).

While values fully or partly mediated the effects of most personality variables, Extraversion directly affected right-wing orientation. This finding can be attributed to the nature of Extraversion, which includes traits such as assertiveness, social dominance, and a preference for social engagement. Earlier studies show that Extraversion influences political participation through political efficacy (Dawes et al., 2014). In addition, Huber et al. (2021) reported a positive and direct relationship between Extraversion and collective political activities in different countries (Huber et al., 2021). Right-wing ideologies often emphasise social order, leadership, and assertiveness, making them appealing to extroverts. Extraverted individuals may be drawn to these ideologies because they align with their inherent social and assertive tendencies.

Agreeableness was found to have a direct negative effect on conservatism. The direct negative relationship between agreeableness and conservatism can be understood in terms of social harmony, openness to diversity, conflict avoidance, empathy, and moral values. Agreeable individuals prioritise social cohesion, inclusivity, and compassionate policies, which align more closely with liberal than with conservative ideologies. The relationship between agreeableness and conservatism, however, seems complex. Hirsh et al. (2010) suggested that individuals who lean towards right-wing ideologies, characterised by competition and self-interest, are less likely to exhibit agreeableness. This negative correlation between agreeableness and conservatism was further supported by Bakker (2016), who found that one aspect of agreeableness, compassion, was linked to liberalism, while another, politeness, was associated with conservatism. Two studies by Hirsh et al. (2010) reported that one aspect of agreeableness (compassion) was linked to liberalism and egalitarianism, while the other aspect (politeness) was connected to conservatism and traditionalism. This suggests that different aspects of agreeableness might have opposing relationships with conservatism.

Limitations

A key limitation of this study is the use of cross-sectional data, which prevents us from making causal inferences. While mediation analyses suggest pathways, they imply causality best examined through longitudinal studies. Conducting longitudinal studies, however, poses significant challenges and might not fit well with sensitive studies about political orientation. Longitudinal studies require tracking participants, meaning that the answers would not be anonymous, which is likely to cause bias. Additionally, it is unclear why measuring personality factors, values, and political orientation at different time points would yield more accurate results, as political opinions can change in response to contemporary events (e.g., election results and political scandals) that may temporarily influence a person’s viewpoint (Dias & Lelkes, 2022). Nevertheless, our cross-sectional data necessitate a cautious interpretation of the mediation results, acknowledging potential limitations in capturing causal dynamics.

The participant pool, sourced from social media, the University of Gothenburg, and personal contacts, may not be ideally representative but likely reflects the University of Gothenburg student population (and their acquaintances). For instance, a higher proportion of female participants were highly educated, and the group included more individuals with left-wing or liberal orientations than right-wing or conservative ones. This characteristic of the sample is evident in some of the score distributions: those of Self-Direction and Benevolence, as well as the personality dimensions Honesty-Humility and Social Conservatism, deviated from normality. This deviation is likely due to the young student sample, which tends to be more liberal and left leaning in Sweden. The use of psychology students was also primarily driven by accessibility and feasibility, which is common in exploratory research, and was considered appropriate given that the aim was to examine mediation mechanisms rather than provide population-level estimates. Nevertheless, the reliance on a student sample limits the generalizability of the findings, and more representative samples are needed in future studies.

Additionally, when handling sensitive personal information, it is prudent to consider the possibility of untruthful responses, whether intentional or due to bias. The use of self-reported, internet-based survey data may also introduce social desirability effects and misrepresentation. However, the survey was conducted entirely anonymously, which likely reduced pressures to conform to perceived norms or to present oneself in a favourable light. While self-report remains a limitation, it is a standard and widely used method in personality and values research. Future studies could complement self-reports with behavioural or longitudinal data to strengthen validity. The sample was also Sweden-centric, suggesting that these findings should be tested in different cultural contexts, which might yield different results. Future studies with nationally representative samples from various countries are needed.

While personality factors and personal values offer some insight into political orientation, relying solely on them provides a limited understanding of this complex issue. It is essential to consider a multifaceted approach to fully grasp how political orientations are formed (Xu et al., 2016). This could include examining the influence of social factors like socialisation, group identity, and life experiences. Additionally, understanding the role of cognitive processes such as information processing, moral reasoning (Campbell et al., 2015), and motivated reasoning is crucial. Furthermore, the impact of the political context itself, including political systems, current events, and media influence, cannot be ignored. By integrating these broader perspectives and employing diverse methodologies, researchers can develop a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding of the formation of political orientation.