Science proves that conservative brains are warped

[DavidDvorkin]

From cable TV news pundits to red-meat speeches in Iowa and New Hampshire, our nation's deep political stereotypes are on full display: Conservatives paint self-indulgent liberals as insufferably absent on urgent national issues, while liberals say fear-mongering conservatives are fixated on exaggerated dangers to the country.

A new study from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln suggests there are biological truths to such broad brushstrokes.

In a series of experiments, researchers closely monitored physiological reactions and eye movements of study participants when shown combinations of both pleasant and unpleasant images. Conservatives reacted more strongly to, fixated more quickly on, and looked longer at the unpleasant images; liberals had stronger reactions to and looked longer at the pleasant images compared with conservatives.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2012-01/uon-tbo010412.php

(I prefer my headline to the one in the article.)

[Sarah Ibarruri]

1. Interesting study! I particularly loved this part....

"Conservatives REACTED MORE STRONGLY TO, FIXATED MORE QUICKLY ON, and LOOKED LONGER AT the unpleasant images; liberals had stronger reactions to and looked longer at the pleasant images compared with conservatives."

Looked longer at unpleasant images? No wonder Repukes are so f'd up.

[rfranklin]

4. The brutal, sadistic or cruel holds a great fascination for the right wingers...

I think they get some sort of sexual gratification from it.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

6. I think you're right. They're fascinated by evil, feel guilty, then go pray it off at church. nt

[xfundy]

2. No wonder the constant fear-mongering is so effective

Surely similar studies produced Fox Noise and the entire GOPig strategy.

[cthulu2016]

3. This could be interpreted just as easily as conservative superiorirty

The same data fits positive conservative views of themselves.

A conservative would read this as liberals being delusional lotus-eaters.

And, as the article says, the conservative mode would be a clear evolutionary advantage.

[Motown_Johnny]

7. except that they are unable to differentiate between real threats and imagined ones

such as WMD in Iraq and/or Saddam being in on 9-11. While confronting these imaginary threats they ignored the war in Afghanistan.


Or when Reagan thought that arming Bin Laden and his followers was a good idea because they would fight against the USSR.


When you are afraid of most everything you end up making far to many mistakes.



Also, the article does not say anything about this being a "clear evolutionary advantage". What it says is:

^snip^

UNL political scientist and co-author John Hibbing said the results might mean that those on the right are more attuned and attentive to aversive elements in life and are more naturally inclined to confront them. From an evolutionary standpoint, that makes sense, he said.



A natural inclination to confront aversive elements is not a clear advantage. In fact it makes more sense to avoid something that is harmful than to confront it. Confronting punitive stimuli isn't going to help anyone or anything raise their offspring.

[DavidDvorkin]

10. Yes. My son said

that he'd like to see the study done with pictures of dead American soldiers and images of demons, to see which group would focus on which image.

[Motown_Johnny]

11. you have a smart son

[Motown_Johnny]

5. add it to the list

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/09/fearmongering-h

^snip^

Conservatives Scare More Easily Than Liberals, Say Scientists



http://scienceblogs.com/cortex/2008/09/why_the_facts_dont_matter_in_p.php

^snip^

Why the Facts Don't Matter in Politics


I think this experiment helps explains a rather disturbing amount of our political discourse. What it neatly demonstrates is that the main reason so many campaigns traffic in dishonest allegations and pseudofacts is that, when it comes to voters, the facts don't really matter. Most of us are just partisan hacks:

Political scientists Brendan Nyhan and Jason Reifler provided two groups of volunteers with the Bush administration's prewar claims that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. One group was given a refutation -- the comprehensive 2004 Duelfer report that concluded that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction before the United States invaded in 2003. Thirty-four percent of conservatives told only about the Bush administration's claims thought Iraq had hidden or destroyed its weapons before the U.S. invasion, but 64 percent of conservatives who heard both claim and refutation thought that Iraq really did have the weapons. The refutation, in other words, made the misinformation worse.

A similar "backfire effect" also influenced conservatives told about Bush administration assertions that tax cuts increase federal revenue. One group was offered a refutation by prominent economists that included current and former Bush administration officials. About 35 percent of conservatives told about the Bush claim believed it; 67 percent of those provided with both assertion and refutation believed that tax cuts increase revenue.

[izquierdista]

8. If conservatives are going to worry about unpleasantness.....

...it might be best to fill their minds with thoughts of Satan, the Boogeyman, and underpants gnomes, so they can't fuck up the real world.

[Hugabear]

9. I've always held the view that conservatism is a mental disease

It's one thing if you're a rich fuck looking to get rich and screw everyone else.

It's quite another if you're a "regular" person voting for those same interests.