Low IQ & Conservative Beliefs Linked to Prejudice

[WingDinger]

There's no gentle way to put it: People who give in to racism and prejudice may simply be dumb, according to a new study that is bound to stir public controversy.

The research finds that children with low intelligence are more likely to hold prejudiced attitudes as adults. These findings point to a vicious cycle, according to lead researcher Gordon Hodson, a psychologist at Brock University in Ontario. Low-intelligence adults tend to gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies, the study found. Those ideologies, in turn, stress hierarchy and resistance to change, attitudes that can contribute to prejudice, Hodson wrote in an email to LiveScience.

"Prejudice is extremely complex and multifaceted, making it critical that any factors contributing to bias are uncovered and understood," he said.


http://news.yahoo.com/low-iq-conservative-beliefs-linked-prejudice-180403506.html

Here is the tie in to more educated persons tending to be liberal. The liberals are more educated, not because education brainwashed them. But because the more intelligent liberal is more capable of being educated.

[Mojorabbit]

1. Still I know a lot of really intelligent conservatives some with prejudice and some without. nt

[elleng]

4. Conservative and predjudiced not the same, at all, in fact.

Unfortunately true 'conservatism' has become a thing of the past, media-wise at least.

Adjective: Holding to traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation, typically in politics or religion.

Noun: A person who is averse to change and holds to traditional values and attitudes, typically in politics.

[renie408]

10. I don't. And I know a lot of conservatives. Hallmarks of true intelligence include

a certain flexibility of mind, a curiosity about the world and the ability to think long term. None of these are prominent qualities of any conservative, no matter what definition you go by. As is mentioned just down thread, conservatism literally means a resistance to change. What intelligent person does not recognize that change is imperative for growth? And what intelligent person isn't interested in growing?

[Boycottdbad]

32. Remove Conservative Funding and lets see how well they do based on IQ

Boycotting ‘s Power Has Been Overlooked
The unsuccessful attempts at Campaign Finance Reform leave citizens little power over the financial influences of special interest. Yet without the financial influence do you think Rick Perry,Michelle Bachman or that ditz from Alaska could stand a chance ? Now with the overwhelming amount of money and benefits from the Citizens United decision going to Republicans, Democrats must assemble public support and strategies to fight the Republicans almost unlimited financial strength.
Below are some of the organizations that may assemble who we have been in contact with as of 1/20/2012.
Boycotting the corporations donating to Republicans will have an impact and restore some sense of control in a population extremely jaded by special interest.
As for Corporations and the special interest opinion, why expose yourself by donating if your going to become public enemy #1 ?
Americans need to beat the special interest money and have been unsuccessful with every attempt. Boycotting gives the strength back to the public in a time when Occupy Wall Street has created an organized citizenry in a discontented atmosphere that only needs a target.
They may have money but look at the clowns they're lining up. So target the money
Don’t forget the threat of Boycott had Fox News cancel Glenn Beck. It was a Boycott then Divesting that brought down The Apartheid Empire
The list does not contain all of the Political Activism Organizations, Universities, University Radio Stations, NPR Stations, News papers, Christian Environmental, Environmental or Social Justice Organizations we have been in contact with because the list is growing by the hour.

Color of Change, Move On .Org, The New Bottom Line, Campaign for Americas Future, EJF Environmental Justice Foundation, EDF Environmental Defense Fund, PDA Progressive Democrats of America, Green Conduct, [e-mail] (Dutch Organization who has had great success speaking directly to Shell Oils Shareholders at Shareholders Meetings)
CREDO ACTION, Clean Water Action, SOJOURNERS, Energy Action Coalition, Campus Progress ETC,
We have the people and a Boycott tool they are deadly afraid of. If we join in and only Boycotted Companies involved in Hydro Fracking it would send fear through every Republican Donor. Lets save our country by using the tool that got the Fox Network to cancel its Golden Boy, The Glenn Beck Show.
Without corporate money, how else could they get a single one of the existing conservative clowns in office. Rick perry was once their golden boy and all the money in the world couldnt help him. If he were truthful and honest ,his hearts passion to close that agency would have reminded him who he was out to get.
Talking points are hard to remember I guess.
Lets Boycott em all and give em all amnesia
Sincerely
Patrick
[e-mail]

[ErikJ]

38. YEAH, The 1% CONS

WHo may be very intelligent but also very greedy, dishonest and cunning who use racism and fear to divide and conquer the 99% to get 50% of the votes.

[elleng]

2. No surprise, really,

and fits right in w rover's tactic to target poorly educated demographic, leading up to w's non-win.

[WingDinger]

3. One striking thing is

the dullards poo poo education, and declare themselves more knowledgeable than the educated.

There are unknown unknowns, and known unknowns, unknown knowns, are prejudice.

[bhikkhu]

33. The Dunning-Kruger effect at work...

"The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which unskilled suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly rating their ability much higher than average, while the highly skilled underrate their own abilities. This bias is attributed to a metacognitive inability of the unskilled to recognize their mistakes.[1]

Actual competence may weaken self-confidence, as competent individuals may falsely assume that others have an equivalent understanding."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

...which perhaps is inherent in psychology as a developmental stage - its been well-studied how toddlers almost universally overestimate their capacities and talents. I suppose some people grow out of that, and others just join the republican party.

[libodem]

5. I knew they

Had to be stupid. Idiots. Slack-jawed cretins. Severely and profoundly..limited.

[Neoma]

6. I all ready knew that.

Just look at the Republican debates...

[undeterred]

7. Authoritarian religion, authoritarian politics, and conservative beliefs about right and wrong

all get swept up together into one shallow black and white worldview.

[hue]

11. This seems so true!!! ...and it seems right wingers have much difficulty...

in making the distinction between reality and their own fantasies. For example, if they think/believe something is true they automatically think their view IS reality or the only truth. Look at all those who believe in the rapture. For them, although there is no evidence to support their beliefs, the words/views of their preachers are for real.

[undeterred]

18. That's because not believing it is tied to the fear of spending eternity in hell.

And if you are raised to believe in it, that is a very difficult thing to put aside. That is why so many religious or formerly religious people still struggle with guilt over all kinds of things... because its not just doing certain things that makes you deserving of eternal punishment, its even believing the wrong things.

[The Wizard]

8. Not all conservatives are bigots

but all bigots are conservative.

[Major Nikon]

12. You don't have to be a bigot to be a Republican

But it's a great start.

[Hutzpa]

9. Well Duh!

Who would have guessed it.

[Jackpine Radical]

13. Shit.

I got into this thread intending to say that.

I hate it when this happens.

[caraher]

14. Boy, this one is easy to misconstrue!

As I understood the research, the main finding was that less intelligent people are more likely to prejudiced, and that political conservatism seemed to be the most powerful factor in explaining which unintelligent people were prejudiced. In other words, if those with low intelligence who adopt conservative political beliefs are were significantly more likely to express racist or prejudiced views than those of low intelligence who do not adopt conservative beliefs.

Contrary to the DU front page graphic (featuring the "Get a brain, morans!" dude), the study did not find that conservatives were less intelligent, or even that being conservative, in itself, meant you were more likely to be prejudiced. (This may be so; it's just not one of their findings). It's worth noting that one limitation is that their measure of prejudice/racism was admitting agreement with various statements. It's quite likely that more intelligent racist conservatives are simply too smart to express that side of themselves so clumsily as to agree with the statements their stupider counterparts accept.

[Amonester]

16. I don't know for you, but 'intelligent' and 'racist' don't fit in the same sentence...

well, as far as I'm concerned.

May have been a mistake in writing.

Or 'intelligent' in some other sense?

But 'racist' and 'conservatives' sure do. (Altough, not ALL.)

[caraher]

34. I agree

"Intelligence" in the study really means IQ test results. But in the real world racist attitudes are not very "intelligent!"

[Amonester]

37. My bad, I missed that meaning, since...

English isn't my 'mother' tongue (Canadien here, wth Florida relatives, and now up-state NY also!)

[nxylas]

48. Even the extreme right has its intellectuals

Not as many as the early part of the 20th century, when many public intellectuals believed in the eugenicist ideals that eventually led to the Final Solution. But there are still people like David Irving around to give an intellectual veneer to racist and fascist ideals.

[JDPriestly]

19. Here is what the article actually said on these points.

"Low-intelligence adults tend to gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies, the study found. Those ideologies, in turn, stress hierarchy and resistance to change, attitudes that can contribute to prejudice, Hodson wrote in an email to LiveScience."

Prejudice was merely one symptom of "stress [on] hierarchy" and "resistance to change." Conservatism proclaims itself to be about these two factors. Hence, the preference for the top-down business model and the desire to avoid government "interference" in business decision-making since the government might require a business to change its conduct and policies.

In addition, the article explains:

"The children in the studies had their intelligence assessed at age 10 or 11; as adults ages 30 or 33, their levels of social conservatism and racism were measured. [Life's Extremes: Democrat vs. Republican]"

and
"Social conservatives were defined as people who agreed with a laundry list of statements such as 'Family life suffers if mum is working full-time,' and 'Schools should teach children to obey authority.' Attitudes toward other races were captured by measuring agreement with statements such as "I wouldn't mind working with people from other races." (These questions measured overt prejudiced attitudes, but most people, no matter how egalitarian, do hold unconscious racial biases; Hodson's work can't speak to this "underground" racism.)"

http://news.yahoo.com/low-iq-conservative-beliefs-linked-prejudice-180403506.html

Socially conservative attitudes and racism were tested separately. Racism correlated to both lower intelligence and conservatism.

The article is quite clear and views the study as conclusive. This does not surprise me at all. That conservatives don't read the article accurately is consistent with the findings in the study.

Some conservatives may be as intelligent as some liberals. But on the average, liberals are more intelligent than conservatives.

[The Doctor.]

25. The problem is that 'intelligence' is not easy to construe to begin with.

There are too many ways to arrive at a particular position on any given thing. Sometimes it's architecture, sometimes it's experience, sometimes it's nutrition.

I'm always skeptical about any study that tries to quantify 'intelligence' with respect to a given social position. I would, on the other hand, wager that on average conservatives are less intelligent and/or educated than most liberals.

[Major Nikon]

15. Republicans are by and large dichotomous thinkers

Everything with them is white or black, good or bad. They simply don't have the cognition to consider anything in the middle. This naturally leads to prejudices and other behavioral problems.

[BrendaBrick]

47. I agree

The thing which stood out the most for me in the article was this:

"Nonetheless, there is reason to believe that strict right-wing ideology might appeal to those who have trouble grasping the complexity of the world."

I think that pretty much sums it up.



Source for pic: http://innoconnects.net/archives/877

[LuckyTheDog]

17. Ummmm...

I buy into the notion that low IQ can be correlated with racism. And, stupid racists DO tend to be drawn to certain right-wing ideas. BUT (and this is important) there are a heck of a lot of intelligent, non-racist conservatives in the world. So, it is wrong to assume that conservative equals stupid.

Racist, however, equals stupid every time.

[JDPriestly]

20. The study tested for prejudice and conservative attitudes separately

and found a correlation between conservatism, prejudice and an IQ that was on the average lower than the average IQ of those who were shown by the test to be liberal with regard not only to prejudice but also with regard to social values.

That does not mean that all conservatives are less intelligent than all liberals. It means that the average conservative is less intelligent than the average liberal.

I posted quotes from the article in another response that back up my understanding of the conclusions of the article.

[DaveJ]

21. I never met anyone who admitted to being racist or prejudice

They all rationalize their views by saying they are just playing for their own team, or they demand everyone to behave the same (the way whites do), but they never admit they are racist or prejudice. They might then accuse liberals of it.

Therefore, this will cause no controversy.

[caraher]

36. I have, sort of...

I've encountered people who pass off racist humor or other statements by arguing that "everyone is at least a little racist" (or sexist or whatever other offensive attitude they want to laugh off).

I think that's projection on their part, at best.

[underpants]

23. I became a Democrat when I was in the Army and saw what a Republican world looked like

"Those ideologies, in turn, stress hierarchy and resistance to change"

You know your place (rank). You do as you are told. You have almost no input into decisions (I made sure changed that as much as I could). Any change is from the top and religously defended regardless of the outcome from those decisions.

[sulphurdunn]

24. Nothing new here.

"Not all conservatives are stupid people, but most stupid people are conservatives." John Stuart Mill (1806-1873)

[Ebadlun]

26. This is interesting

And I hope you'll be kind to a British guest, but the US conservative mindset intrigues me.

The British one is just naked nimby-ism, xenophobia and tax-avoidance, not very subtle. But US Conservatives self-identify as Conservatives in a way that UK ones don't, and purport to have a coherent belief system that can be opposed to liberalism, and it's become refined to an increasingly narrow set of axioms - anti-abortion, anti-gay, small-government I think are the big three, with the fourth, anti-non-white, finding ever more creative ways to disguise itself.

Even those three contradict - how can you be anti-government and pro-state and still want the government to clamp down on gayness at the federal level?

There are others - pro-military, pro-fidelity, pro-constitution, anti-drugs, pro-states-rights, but these seem more negotiable. Newt can get away with wanting to sack judges he doesn't like and still be the conservative Messiah (they should know, they've followed a few).

Essentially, looking for inconsistencies in Conservative thought is like picking holes in the plots of summer blockbuster movies - it's not the point. It appeals to something visceral and it sells.

[WingDinger]

28. you got it.

[renie408]

29. At its roots, conservatism is based in fear. Conservatives live in a scarier world than liberals.

They live in a world where anything different is suspicious. They live in a world where a strong and guiding father figure makes them feel safer and so they flock to hard line churches. And fear leads to hatred and anger and violence. You can distill all of the conservatives positions down to fear.

[eridani]

30. I've found this to be true by doorbelling my neighborhood

Low income, but yards and property are treated very differently by liberals and conservatives. The liberals tend not to have locked gates (though dog owners are in a separate category here), but the conservatives all have NO TRESPASSING, This Property Protected by Mr. Smith and Mr. Wesson, KEEP OUT, and lots of locks. These are people who don't look like they have much worth stealing, either. Don't know if this is necessarily inborn--seems that a traumatic experience may well account for greater fearfulness.

[sofa king]

44. Which brings us to a related study....

Your observation and others below square quite well with another study quite relevant to this discussion (.pdf file):

http://psychoanalystsopposewar.org/resources_files/ConsevatismAsMotivatedSocialCognition.pdf

"Political Conservatism as Motivated Social Cognition."

That article does a good job of defining the "right wing authoritarian," who were the 23% of Americans who supported George W. Bush no matter what. They are motivated by fear and uncertainty.

The article deftly avoids the smart-or-stupid issue by simply citing other studies which show that RWAs have trouble thinking logically. Which is a smart guy's way of calling someone else stupid... I think.

They're aware enough of their liabilities to be afraid, as you noticed. Because they can't think logically, they tend to be believers, and they believe whatever they are told by the authority figures they trust. They also want guarantees about the future, hence the heavy religion. It's probably also no coincidence that Newt Gingrich called himself a "Futurist" as his crappy little Georgia college. He was building his cult--or trying to.

American conservative leaders figured out long ago that the messages can be contradictory as hell as long as the messenger remains consistent and authoritative in bearing. I think Reagan and W. were both dumbass RWAs who were carried along by a circle of manipulators--the authorities they trusted.

[Bolo Boffin]

41. I think it goes back to the Puritan ideal.

Enforcing religious law through government power.

This is government in its proper place according to the Puritans. The government leaves them alone and free because they're good Christians. The government punishes others for not living up to their moral code. The government is also not allowed to spend money on things they deem abhorrent because that means their good Christian money could be supporting evil.

That pretty much gathers together everything in the US conservative mindset.

[cindyperry2010]

27. Wow

who would have thunk it?

[bayareaboy]

31. I don't belive that there are many Conservatives around ... ...

anymore. Then again I don't call many folks conservatives either.

I call them reactionary, nuckle-dragging, fascists and lately just, stupid. Course that is just me.

[upi402]

35. Rain is wet

This just in...

[Grolph1]

39. Stupid people are too stupid to know that they are stupid

That is all

[chervilant]

40. hmm...

Let's set aside for the moment the likelihood (hinted at by the researchers and the author of the referenced article) that the relationship between 'low IQ' and prejudice is spurious. First, let's look at "intelligence" as 'IQ,' shall we?

We humans are innately curious. We are creative creatures. Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of needs suggests that our drive to create is as important to our existence as food, water, and shelter. An essential component of our creative drive is the commensurate need to be recognized for our contributions. ALL of us have the capacity to create (save for a very few whose mental processes are hampered by disease or injury). ALL of us thrive on recognition (e.g., we don’t need to be told we’re stupid or slow).

If we look at contemporary research on timed IQ tests, we find that most of the participating research subjects score 'near genius' if the timed element of the test is removed. I contend that this research substantiates the fact that all human beings possess fully functioning, fully capable brains (again, save for a very few whose brains have been damaged or are hampered by disease). According to contemporary research, including research conducted to assess current educational methodologies, we humans all learn in different ways, and at different paces.

Now, consider this: our species has evolved a system of education that conflates hierarchy with intellect. The faster you can solve a complex problem, the 'smarter' you are perceived to be. If you are a child of privilege, your IQ may only be limited by your own intellectual laziness (Dubyah comes readily to mind...). However, if you are a child living in poverty, solving complex academic problems is likely subsumed by the daily rigors of simply surviving. If your primary language is not English, solving complex academic problems may be impossible until you learn to speak a new language. In all these instances, your IQ could measure off the charts, but who would know?

Worse yet, our vaunted system of public education is structured to convince two-thirds to three-quarters of us that we have average or below average intellects. Can you say "self-fulfilling prophecy"? Might you be one of those unfortunates who grew up believing that an average intellect was your unenviable albatross? Must we blame those among us who bought into this stultifying, hierarchical definition of IQ?

In The Age of American Unreason, Susan Jacoby notes that

America is now ill with a powerful mutant strain of intertwined ignorance, anti-rationalism, and anti-intellectualism...the virulence of the current outbreak is inseparable from an unmindfulness that is, paradoxically, both aggressive and passive. This condition is aggressively promoted by everyone, from politicians to media executives, whose livelihood depends on a public that derives its opinions from sound bites and blogs, and it is passively accepted by a public in thrall to the serpent promising effortless enjoyment from the fruit of the tree of infotainment.

If our species is to evolve beyond this "Age of American Unreason," we must not buy into the specious argument that 'conservative' individuals are likely to possess 'low IQs' and/or have the tendency to be prejudiced, while ‘liberal’ individuals are likely to be ‘intellectual snobs.’ We must refuse to snarf these divisive red herrings. We must change the dialogue.

[TahitiNut]

42. This might as well be a Faux News market research study.

That's their demographic to a "Tea."

[whistler162]

43. Oh wow another idiotic article by someone be

Anne Coulter!

[knocklindquist]

45. Here we go again

If these guys spent as much time researching the results of liberal social policy on the poor and weak as they did trying to prove 'conservative = dumb', they would all vote republican.

[morningfog]

46. What, in you opinion, are the "results of liberal social policy on the poor and weak"?

[hifiguy]

50. We got a live one here.

Wonder how long s/he'll last.

BTW, proving that many conservatives are idiots requires nothing more than the application of basic logic to their arguments.

[hifiguy]

49. A leading indicator of intelligence is

knowing what one does not know. Most "conservatives" and all of the seriously retrograde mouth-breathers like 'baggers and freepers are self-proclaimed experts in every field of human endeavor because they use "common sense" instead of that namby-pamby and prob'ly homosekshul/sissy book learnin'. The very nature of their argument proves their profound stupidity.