Featured Research
from universities, journals, and other organizations
Political attitudes derive from body and mind: 'Negativity bias' explains difference between liberals and conservatives
Date:
July 31, 2014
Source:
University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Summary:
Neither conscious
decision-making or parental upbringing fully explain why some people
lean left and others lean right, researchers say. A mix of deep-seated
psychology and physiological responses are at the core of political
differences.
Pictured are University of Nebraska-Lincoln political scientists Kevin Smith, left, and John Hibbing, right.
Credit: University Communications, University of Nebraska-Lincoln/Craig Chandler
Do people
make a rational choice to be liberal or conservative? Do their mothers
raise them that way? Is it a matter of genetics?
Two political scientists from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln and a
colleague from Rice University say that neither conscious
decision-making nor parental upbringing fully explain why some people
lean left while others lean right.
A growing body of evidence shows that physiological responses and deep-seated psychology are at the core of political differences, the researchers say in the latest issue of the journal Behavioral and Brain Sciences.
"Politics might not be in our souls, but it probably is in our DNA," says the article written by political scientists John Hibbing and Kevin Smith of UNL and John Alford of Rice University.
"These natural tendencies to perceive the physical world in different ways may in turn be responsible for striking moments of political and ideological conflict throughout history," Alford said.
Using eye-tracking equipment and skin conductance detectors, the three researchers have observed that conservatives tend to have more intense reactions to negative stimuli, such as photos of people eating worms, burning houses or maggot-infested wounds.
Combining their own results with similar findings from other researchers around the world, the team proposes that this so-called "negativity bias" may be a common factor that helps define the difference between conservatives, with their emphasis on stability and order, and liberals, with their emphasis on progress and innovation.
"Across research methods, samples and countries, conservatives have been found to be quicker to focus on the negative, to spend longer looking at the negative, and to be more distracted by the negative," the researchers wrote.
The researchers caution that they make no value judgments about this finding. In fact, some studies show that conservatives, despite their quickness to detect threats, are happier overall than liberals. And all people, whether liberal, conservative or somewhere in between, tend to be more alert to the negative than to the positive -- for good evolutionary reasons. The harm caused by negative events, such as infection, injury and death, often outweighs the benefits brought by positive events.
"We see the 'negativity bias' as a common finding that emerges from a large body of empirical studies done not just by us, but by many other research teams around the world," Smith explained. "We make the case in this article that negativity bias clearly and consistently separates liberals from conservatives."
The most notable feature about the negativity bias is not that it exists, but that it varies so much from person to person, the researchers said.
"Conservatives are fond of saying 'liberals just don't get it,' and liberals are convinced that conservatives magnify threats," Hibbing said. "Systematic evidence suggests both are correct."
Many scientists appear to agree with the findings by Hibbing, Smith and Alford. More than 50 scientists contributed 26 peer commentary articles discussing the Behavioral and Brain Sciences article.
Only three or four of the articles seriously disputed the negativity bias hypothesis. The remainder accepted the general concept, while suggesting modifications such as better defining and conceptualizing a negativity bias; more deeply exploring its nature and origins; and more clearly defining liberalism and conservatism across history and culture.
A growing body of evidence shows that physiological responses and deep-seated psychology are at the core of political differences, the researchers say in the latest issue of the journal Behavioral and Brain Sciences.
"Politics might not be in our souls, but it probably is in our DNA," says the article written by political scientists John Hibbing and Kevin Smith of UNL and John Alford of Rice University.
"These natural tendencies to perceive the physical world in different ways may in turn be responsible for striking moments of political and ideological conflict throughout history," Alford said.
Using eye-tracking equipment and skin conductance detectors, the three researchers have observed that conservatives tend to have more intense reactions to negative stimuli, such as photos of people eating worms, burning houses or maggot-infested wounds.
Combining their own results with similar findings from other researchers around the world, the team proposes that this so-called "negativity bias" may be a common factor that helps define the difference between conservatives, with their emphasis on stability and order, and liberals, with their emphasis on progress and innovation.
"Across research methods, samples and countries, conservatives have been found to be quicker to focus on the negative, to spend longer looking at the negative, and to be more distracted by the negative," the researchers wrote.
The researchers caution that they make no value judgments about this finding. In fact, some studies show that conservatives, despite their quickness to detect threats, are happier overall than liberals. And all people, whether liberal, conservative or somewhere in between, tend to be more alert to the negative than to the positive -- for good evolutionary reasons. The harm caused by negative events, such as infection, injury and death, often outweighs the benefits brought by positive events.
"We see the 'negativity bias' as a common finding that emerges from a large body of empirical studies done not just by us, but by many other research teams around the world," Smith explained. "We make the case in this article that negativity bias clearly and consistently separates liberals from conservatives."
The most notable feature about the negativity bias is not that it exists, but that it varies so much from person to person, the researchers said.
"Conservatives are fond of saying 'liberals just don't get it,' and liberals are convinced that conservatives magnify threats," Hibbing said. "Systematic evidence suggests both are correct."
Many scientists appear to agree with the findings by Hibbing, Smith and Alford. More than 50 scientists contributed 26 peer commentary articles discussing the Behavioral and Brain Sciences article.
Only three or four of the articles seriously disputed the negativity bias hypothesis. The remainder accepted the general concept, while suggesting modifications such as better defining and conceptualizing a negativity bias; more deeply exploring its nature and origins; and more clearly defining liberalism and conservatism across history and culture.
Story Source:
The above story is based on materials provided by University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.
The above story is based on materials provided by University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.
Journal Reference:
- John R. Hibbing, Kevin B. Smith, John R. Alford. Differences in negativity bias underlie variations in political ideology. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 2014; 37 (03): 297 DOI: 10.1017/S0140525X13001192
Cite This Page:
Share This
More Science & Society News
Thursday, July 31, 2014
Featured Research
from universities, journals, and other organizations
Corrosion Lab Tests Suggest Need for Underground Gas Tank Retrofits
July 31, 2014 — A hidden hazard lurks
beneath many of the roughly 156,000 gas stations across the United
States. The hazard is corrosion in parts of underground gas storage
tanks -- corrosion that could result in ... full story
- Gas Tanks Under Gas Stations May Be Leaking
- Mobility of Notable Intellectuals Mapped
- Physiology, Psychology of Political Differences
- Implicit Hierarchies for Race, Religion, Age?
- Boat Noise Impacts Survival of Sea Hares
- Fear of Losing Money: Investor Risk Tolerance
- Caution Against Exploitation of Deep Ocean
- Superman 'Breaks' a Fundamental Law of Physics
- 3-D TV May Be Victim of Negative Preconceptions
- Why We Should Vaccinate Boys Against HPV, Too
newer top stories | older top stories
Featured Videos
from AP, Reuters, AFP, and other news services
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please leave a comment-- or suggestions, particularly of topics and places you'd like to see covered