People who startle easily in response to threatening images or loud sounds seem to have a biological predisposition to adopt conservative political positions on many hot-button issues.
The finding suggests that people who are particularly sensitive to signals of visual or auditory threats also tend to adopt a more defensive stance on political issues, such as immigration, gun control, defense spending and patriotism. People who are less sensitive to potential threats, by contrast, seem predisposed to hold more liberal positions on those issues.
The study takes the research a step beyond psychology by suggesting that innate physiological differences among people may help shape their startle responses and their political inclinations…
John Hibbing and the other researchers stressed that physiology is only one factor in how people form their political views — and far from the most important factor. Startle responses, moreover, cannot be used to predict the political views of any one individual — there are many liberals who startle easily and many conservatives who do not. What the study did find is that, across groups of people, there seems to be an association between sensitivity to physical threats and sensitivity to threats affecting social groups and social order…
Tee hee.
Watch George W. when someone taps him on the shoulder. He panics.
I think politics got in the way of assessing the results of this study. NPR had this story today and opposing experts suggested the results are not as cut and dry as this study suggests.
How are those who fight against gun control the fraidy cats? I mean, isn’t the gun control stance basically fear of the gun itself?
And I thought I was deciding for myself.
So, if this true, then is the opposite true too? That a lack of sensitivity to auditory or visual threats leads to liberal thinking? Either way we’re not responsible right?
— there are many liberals who startle easily and many conservatives who do not.
So, the point is… Oh, that’s right, a headline that derides a group of people that you don’t agree with.
Turns out experts say Conservatives are non-empathetic too.
#3–calin==I think the fear you are thinking of is the needless death that results from the use of guns. Not guns in and of themselves.
#4–gooddebate==why do you think sensitivity to auditory or visual threats is derisive? I would think it has darwinian benefits to those too dullwitted to react to the sound of a snapping branch. Why do you buy into others framing issues for yourself? Gee, that might be another conservative tendency==and yes, very derisive.
@3; Good point. Furthermore, liberalism is basically the fear that you might have to work to earn a paycheck. Another symptom of chronic liberalism is the fear of life without the nanny state telling you what you can and cannot do.
#3
I think the fear of guns and the “control of guns” is a typical symptom of the “blame game”. Something has to be blamed for things going wrong. In this case, it’s an inanimate object. Humans can’t possibly be to blame for anything!(sarcasm).
Conservatives are by their definition resistant to change, and will do anything to keep everything just like they are.
Whereas conservatism is, to borrow an old phrase, the paralyzing fear that somehow, somewhere, someone might be having fun.
George Bush has a defensive stance on immigration?
Our nutballs have no sense of humor even though they’re often funny to watch – when they’re not trying to kill someone. From behind heavy armor.
#9 MikeNumbnuts – No Georgie just has a ‘wide stance’ on immigration like Senator Craig.
they’re not cowards, it’s deeper than that.
every conservative has a private fantasy wherein they are holding a gun and just shot somebody dead, and not only are not in trouble for it, they are a hero.
they all think that they’re clint eastwood, and that simply by being a tough guy, all the world’s problems are just going to magically work themselves out.
the only thing required for this world view to work out is that you kill everyone who does not submit to your will.
ask the romans how well that worked out for them.
A conservative is afraid to leave his house.
A liberal crosses the street without looking.
A conservative buys a house he can afford and pays down the mortgage quickly.
A liberal buys a mansion in a flood zone with a sub-prime mortgage.
some of the greatest cowards are the abortionist’s who are afraid of the obligation of rearing a child and maybe having their swinging and doping style cut back.
heh
liberals do not fear the terrorists, but want engage in the kind of broad reaching deep-seated security systems that actually work.
conservatives want to ban liquids on airplanes and bomb everyone.
#12 – “they’re not cowards, it’s deeper than that.
every liberal has a private fantasy wherein they are holding a dollar and just gave it to somebody, and not only are liked for it, they are a hero.
they all think that they’re Jesus freakin’ Christ, and that simply by being a nice guy, all the world’s problems are just going to magically work themselves out.
the only thing required for this world view to work out is that you take wealth from everyone who does not submit to your will.
ask the soviets how well that worked out for them.”
This is all part of the same, old, worn out crap. Instead of reacting with emotion and sounding foolish, why not actually analyze the policies and see what has worked and what doesn’t? Not possible when politics has become a game of massaging people’s egos so they can feel good about themselves.
#16
okay, let’s go
policies:
in the days before environmental regulation, the rivers were straight up poison (thanks to liberals we have clean water)
in the days before osha, people, including children, died horrible deaths in horrible workplaces routinely (thanks to liberals we don’t think it’s normal to send our children into factories)
in the days before the fda, the food supply was russian roulette thanks to liberals, we can be reasonably sure our food ain’t gonna kill us
before banking regulation, you could lose your fortune even with the most conservative investment strategy with no legal recourse thanks to liberals, america’s banks are strong enough to absorb most of the recent failures and are the most trusted in the world
before g.w. was elected the federal budget was (wait for it) balanced thanks to conservatives the deficit is astronomical, just like under (wait for it) reagan
liberals fund basic scientific research so that we as a society can benefit as a whole from technology, conservatives would grant permanent monopoly status to drug companies who base their formulas on university research
gosh, we liberals hand you knuckleheads a balanced budget, the best universities in the world, and in eight years you trashed all of it.
nice going!
# 3 Calin
“How are those who fight against gun control the fraidy cats? ”
Well you feel you need the gun. That would be a good part of it.
# 7 Springheel Jack
“Furthermore, liberalism is basically the fear that you might have to work to earn a paycheck.”
I employ lots of liberals. They all work very hard. None of them are on the internet posting on blogs during work hours like you seem to be. LOL Dolt!
# 13 chuck
“A liberal buys a mansion in a flood zone with a sub-prime mortgage.”
That’s funny I own many homes and none of them are in a flood plane and none of them were bought with a loan of any kind much less a sub prime loan.
#18 Grogyle
Hate to tell you this, you were on such a roll there, but the 4 major acts you cite were all initiated under republican administrations:
Clean Water Act; OSHA; SIPC – -Nixon administration
FDA – – T. Roosevelt administration (Pure Food & Drug act)
“the best universities in the world” are, not created by liberals in congress but are private, many started by religious organizations (Harvard, Yale,Brown etc.) – not liberal government entities.
“Liberals fund basic scientific research”
From Wikipedia, regarding research funding:
“In the OECD, around two-thirds of research and development in scientific and technical fields is carried out by industry, and 20% and 10% respectively by universities and government..”
10% by government is a far cry from your hubris that liberals gallantly march out to save the world with our tax dollars in their pockets.
“you could lose your fortune even with the most conservative investment strategy with no legal recourse”
If you have investments, they are not insured by liberals, they are partially covered under SIPC, again created under the Nixon administration.
#18 grog, Epic rant. You make me proud to be a liberal.
btw, isn’t this the third time in a week we’ve hashed over this bit about some study of twitch response in conservatives versus liberals? Can’t we at least come up with some new Palin bashing expose or other infotainment?
I find studies like this specious, no matter which side you’re on. People change their political affiliation with time, experience, new insight, etc. It’s hard to buy the concept that their physiologic parameters suddenly change also. I’m a conservative, but have voted for more democratic candidates for president than republican. Can McGovern still run again?
I don’t own a gun because I’m afraid. Hell, I don’t even lock my doors. I went out of town to a funeral for 3 days a couple of months ago and left my house wide open.
I own a gun because target shooting is fun. You don’t want me to own a gun because you are afraid of me owning a gun.
BTW, the pistol came with me on the trip. I don’t leave the guns unguarded…just in case.
Hillary finds out that Palin is invited to the Anti Iran rally and runs away. Obama complains to the organizers and Palin is disinvited. Hillary decides to come now that Palin isn’t there.
A true profile in courage.
#22–montanna==you reveal a deepseated misunderstanding of group characteristics. You take a snapshot of the group today and find the fraidy-cat response. Time goes by. People join the group, people leave the group. Take another snapshot. The group is still fraidy-cat.
You should stay away from scientific measurement and stick with your ideology and excuses.
#25 ==b=b=b==0=b=b=b=o=o==
==Are you doing some clever spoof of someone who didn’t read the study in ‘Science’ and is also ignorant of how scientific studies are done properly to erase inherent bias? Or doesn’t understand why physiologists should avoid social analysis? Verrrrry clever bobilski – you almost had me there. You are the ultimate prankster.
=… === =… =… === .. … .= ..=. === === .=..
James Hill, MikeN, Springheel Jack, Matt Garrett, MontanaGuy,
Boo!
# 20
yeah, conservatives like george bush simply have to cross party lines and do like we do in order to save the republic from the wretched excesses of the laissez faire crowd.
you forgot: nixon created welfare, clinton actually got a 2 year cap put in place on it.
you’re a fine liberal thinker, montanaguy
keep up the good work!
#28 Grogyle:
Nixon created welfare? Really?! All by himself? Wow!
Since he ‘created’ the EPA and OSHA also, he should be a shoe-in ‘people’s choice’ for the liberal pantheon – for sure, dude. Thanks for the heads up.
==. .=. === ==. .. … .= ..=. === === .=..
#29
typical conservative — list a lot of claims about what you boys do
then when what they do is shown in a light you don’t like, change you tune
mercurial, i’ll grant you that.
but you’re right, a conservative would never believe that the government should ever be in the business of protecting the weak in our society.
how foolish of me.