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.
# 23 Calin
“I own a gun because target shooting is fun. ”
Then I guess you are ok with not carrying a concealed weapon since it is just for target shooting right?
“You don’t want me to own a gun because you are afraid of me owning a gun.”
Actually, I have no problem with you owning a gun as long as you are not an ex-con or mentally unstable.
See you think you are in a debate with someone who is anti gun but you are wrong. I am indifferent about guns. I am neither for them nor against them because I don’t think guns are the problem. FEAR and people who think a gun make them safer are the problem.
I always thought cats were just little Republicans.
#26–montanna==still a spark of open honesty in you, but it appears to be glowing dimmer.
You say: “you almost had me there.” Yep, you read my post and thought, gee he is right, but then you remembered who for whatever reason you think you must be, and the kneejerk response was generated. A little bit late, but still triumphant. Sounds like in another year or two, you will have all your blood and common humanity drained, and another neo-con will step into the spot light to claim credit for all that is good.
Too many years around Beantown to really care for Mike Barnicle – but, he’s doing Hardball, today, and just passing through, flipping channels – there he is and he says:
“BOO! That’s for all you conservatives out there.”
Har!
#27, tML,
Damn you !!! Now there is fecal matter and urine all over the place.
#29, Hanahmontana,
Actually Nixon would have been a great President except for his two albatrosses; Viet Nam and Watergate. The same could be said for Johnson but that is off topic. While Nixon is generally thought to be very right wing, he had mellowed some by the time he took over the White House.
#33
B==b==o==b==b==b==b==bo
Is that your best shot? Namecalling? When a guy (or gal?) like you hasn’t read the study and displays his/her ignorance of it he/she should really stop posting on the topic after being pwn3d. Also, 10 more demerits for not having a sense of humor. Shhhhhhhhhhhh…..
#36
Mr Fusion
Your best post ever. Nixon, by todays standards, was a closet liberal. Not an attractive guy, but didn’t deserve all the crap he took – well other than Watergate – that was a stupid mistake, covering up. I voted against him anyway – he was too liberal.
(Joke) [for Bobbo] McGovern was an actual, for-real anti-war candidate (and a combat veteran), unlike the poseurs of today. The Eagleton swap hurt him badly.
When you look at the legislation that was signed by Nixon and what he did”price controls”Test ban treaty”Salt 1″he was a real liberal.
#6
I said that the headline is derisive (
Conservatives are Fraidy-Cats?). I guess you don’t have to agree but it registers on my derisive meter.
You are correct that the post for which we are responding is using the technique of framing. Note the quote from the article:
“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.”
But the entire presentation gives the impression that this probably “far from the most important factor” might actually be true, wink, wink.
Look at the first sentence, “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.” In journalism this is know as the sps (single purpose statement), notice how it sounds authoritative.
I think that an honest analysis of this post is that it’s derisive to conservatives.
#36 Don’t forget Nixon started Freddie, yea for that!
#38, billa,
he was a real liberal.
Nope. He was a strong conservative all the way which explains his errors. Only he didn’t wear his patriotism on a lapel pin. If anything he was a pragmatist governing for the best of the nation.
Regardless, todays conservatives, generally, are more inclined to be scaredy cats than not.
Let me get this straight, being less afraid of threats makes you more likely to be afraid your neighbor might be armed and thus more inclined to ban guns… because you feel they aren’t a threat?
Right?
or Left?
Yeah, right. They’re trying to link political stance to genes too. ED posted this the way he did to drive posts so DU could make ad money (of course). Here’s the real conclusion: “We could spin a story saying it is bad to be so jumpy, but you can also spin a story saying it is bad to be naive about threats,” he said. “From an evolutionary point of view, an organism needs to respond to a threat or it won’t be around for very long. We are not saying one response is more normal than another.”
Just to keep the flames going so DU can make money:
Conservatives take a poop and bury it. Liberals take a poop and eat it so they don’t pollute Mother Earth.
People who do not respond to threats are liberals?
I just thought they tended to end up dead.
My bad but I’d seriously need to know what this guy called a liberal and what he called a conservative.
A liberterian isn’t exactly a social welfare state Democrate of stands for nothing modern Repubican party hack either.
I can see that there is going to be some sort of tie in to how people react to unpleasant surprises and how they vote.
Tieing this in with modern political parties is a lot more dubius.
One of the most basic issues is that lot of people including me consider the main players on both sides to without morals or ethics and would not believe them if they said the sun rose in the East without checking other sources first.
I always knew Republicans are nothing but big pussies =3
If you want a serious presentation on the differences between liberalism and conservatism, here’s an informative video lecture on ted.com
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/jonathan_haidt_on_the_moral_mind.html
Nixon got us out of Vietnam.
Plus he was largely innocent in Watergate, his impeachment should have been for other abuses of office. For example he sent the IRS after political opponents, and in his book he thinks it is OK, even while apologizing for Watergate.
#45–Ariane==thanks for that link. Informative, accurate, and humorous. Some other good vids there too–and all downloadable. GREAT!
For all my Republican friends, let me restate my post #25. Do you really, I mean REALLY, think that groups of people who do/think “A” differ from groups of people who do/think “Not A” differ on that characteristic alone? Anyone complaining of the results reported in this thread simply don’t understand group measurement, and thats true whether or not I have a sense of humor about the USA being sold down the drain by our do nothing Congress led by our corrupt Neo-Con controlled presidency.
Deowll–I’m sure you know liberal and conservatives who are whatever. That does not deny the validity of groups testing differently. Your complaint only reveals your ignorance of sound sociological measurements and “tendencies.” Tendencies==people tend one way or another. The switch back and forth. Both groups have some of both.===all equals group measurement.
The main point, not to be swamped in mindless political posturing for the sake of posturing only, is simply to recognize that different groups of people come to issues with different points of view honestly arrived at and with different needs and wants needing to be addressed. Thats important for both liberals and conservatives to know about the other groups, but more importantly about themselves.
Reject any inquiry into how you understand the world and you deny yourself the most important knowledge of the world–how do I understand the world, how do I form opinions, how should I review/change those opinions? Where do my real interests lay? What part of me is really an injurious artifact that should be changed?
Every day you awake with the opportunity to understand better who you are. Why not make a change and try to do that?
(fantastic picture, BTW)
This study is compatible with a couple of other studies:
Were conservatives whiny children?
Children who at age 4 were described by their teachers as “self- reliant, energetic, somewhat dominating, relatively under- controlled and resilient” identified as politically liberal 20 years later.
Conversely, children described as “feeling easily victimized, easily offended, indecisive, fearful, rigid, inhibited and relatively over-controlled and vulnerable” favored conservative politics when they grew up.
http://tinyurl.com/3otvll
Study finds left-wing brain, right-wing brain
Previous psychological studies have found that conservatives tend to be more structured and persistent in their judgments whereas liberals are more open to new experiences. The latest study found those traits are not confined to political situations but also influence everyday decisions…
Based on the results, he said, liberals could be expected to more readily accept new social, scientific or religious ideas.
http://tinyurl.com/2ctdz4
Could be that “Liberals too Brain-dead to Respond to Stimulus” Teh heh
#47:
Shhhhhhhh…..
I agree.
I have conservative friends who are TERRIFIED of terrorism, foreigners, mexicans, iran, north korea, poor people, blacks.
They protect themselves with a daily dose of Fox News, the bible, their guns and the american flag.