Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Political views 'hard-wired' into your brain - Guess who's afraid!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
WillYourVoteBCounted Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-29-10 12:00 AM
Original message
Political views 'hard-wired' into your brain - Guess who's afraid!

Irony! People with "right wing views" aren't tough, they are afraid!




Political views 'hard-wired' into your brain

By Richard Alleyne, Science Correspondent 5:00PM GMT 28 Dec 2010

Tories may be born not made, claims a study that suggests people with right wing views have a larger area of the brain associated with fear.



Scientists have found that people with conservative views have brains with larger amygdalas, almond shaped areas in the centre of the brain often associated with anxiety and emotions.

On the otherhand, they have a smaller anterior cingulate, an area at the front of the brain associated with courage and looking on the bright side of life.

...
However as they were all adults it was hard to say whether their brains had been born that way or had developed through experience.



"In politics, what begins in fear usually ends in folly." ---- Coleridge.






Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-29-10 12:07 AM
Response to Original message
1. That certainly holds true for conservative Republicans. Fear of the other rules their politics.
That, and greed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GoneOffShore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-29-10 12:09 AM
Response to Original message
2. Seems like that there are a lot of the fearful here on DU.
Edited on Wed Dec-29-10 12:09 AM by GoneOffShore
Maybe they're on the wrong board.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AndyTiedye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-29-10 03:15 AM
Response to Reply #2
10. Being Afraid of Wingnut Repiglickins Getting Into Power is Perfectly Rational
considering what happened the last time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GoneOffShore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-29-10 10:34 AM
Response to Reply #10
15. I was talking about the scared of their own shadow types
And "Anything for security!"

Those who need a security binky in the form of government surveillance and who think the TSA is there to protect us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lost-in-FL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-29-10 12:18 AM
Response to Original message
3. This makes a lot of sense, however...
I think the sampling is poor. You can't possibly make a serious conclusion like that based on 90 students. To me it is irresponsible and gives scientific research a bad name. But of course, that is my friends my humble opinion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OnyxCollie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-29-10 03:41 AM
Response to Reply #3
11. This research has been going on for decades.
I wrote a paper on this topic. Here is the lit review:

“Behavior results from a process that involves, or functions as it entails, conscious
choice” (Monroe & Maher, 1995). These choices are developed through a method by which the
actor’s preferences are ordered and evaluated to determine which will provide the greatest utility
and what course of action should be taken to achieve them (Monroe & Maher, 1995). These
preferences include a predilection for survival (Chatterjee, 1972; Monroe & Maher, 1995).
Established and uniform, these preferences are shaped through the acquisition of information
(Jost et al., 2003) from opinion leaders whose function is to attach idea-elements together
(Converse, 1964).

This process of acquiring information from authoritative sources to satisfy preferences
which include survival is described as laying the foundation for a belief system (Converse, 1964;
Kruglanski & Thompson, 1999a, 1999b as cited in Jost et al., 2003; McGuire, 1985, as cited in
Jost et al., 2003). Converse (1964) and Kunda (1990, as cited in Jost et al., 2003) suggest that
this belief system is regulated by multiple constraints. The constraints offer a probability that a
specific attitude held in a belief system will result in certain other attitudes being held (Converse,
1964). These constraints are identified as logical, psychological, and social (Converse, 1964).
Jost et al. (2003) further expand on the concept by describing these constraints as existential
(fear, curiosity), epistemic (authoritarian, liberal), and ideological (group dominance,
egalitarianism). According to Jost et al. (2003), belief systems fulfill psychological needs.

Within the constraints, belief systems provide a principled doctrine by which new
information obtained is compared to prior associations in order to choose a course which
provides the greatest utility (Jost et al., 2003). However, these belief systems do not operate in a
vacuum; uncertain conditions and numerous variables can influence personal motivations by
invoking emotional responses, leading to a reformulation of logic that while not syllogistically
sound, is principled nonetheless (Jost et al., 2003).

Information gathering in early childhood requires the formation of relationships (Weber
& Federico, 2007). Attachment theory states that relationships are sought in order to reduce
anxiety and provide a sense of security (Sroufe & Waters, 1977, as cited in Weber & Federico,
2007). Successful proximity-seeking efforts create a secure attachment style, inspiring selfconfidence,
curiosity and an openness to new experiences (Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters, & Wall,
1978, as cited in Weber & Federico, 2007). Failed proximity-seeking efforts result in anxiety
stemming from the lack of security, compounded by distress over the failure to establish a
relationship (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2003, as cited in Weber and Federico, 2007). Recurring
failure or inconsistency (Ainsworth et al., 1978, as cited in Weber & Federico, 2007) in
proximity-seeking efforts creates two insecure attachment styles; anxious and avoidant (Weber &
Federico, 2007).

Anxious attachment style is associated with fixations on proximity-seeking and emotional
support (Weber & Federico, 2007). Avoidant attachment style abandons proximity-seeking and
instead relies on self-dependence to control anxiety (Weber & Federico, 2007). Brennan, Clark,
& Shaver (1998, as cited in Weber & Federico, 2007) have determined that anxious and avoidant
attachment styles in adults manifest themselves as either elevated states of arousal with a fixation
on close relationships, or as an emotional disconnect with an aversion to close relationships,
respectively.

Duckitt (2001, as cited in Weber & Federico, 2007) proposes that childrearing practices
lead to the development of personality traits which endorse world views that form ideology.
Children who have attained a secure attachment style are open to new information more than
those with either of the two insecure attachment styles (Cassidy, 1986, as cited in Weber &
Federico, 2007), as well as being less dogmatic and less reliant on ethnic stereotypes
(Mikulincer, 1997, as cited in Weber & Federico, 2007). Additionally, Mikulincer & Florian
(2000, as cited in Weber & Federico, 2007) have shown that secure attachment styles “mitigate
the effect of mortality salience on the denigration of moral transgressors” (p. 394).

It has been demonstrated that children who have attained insecure attachment styles later
as adults develop Right Wing Authoritarian (RWA) ideologies, in which the world is viewed as a
dangerous place (Altemeyer, 1998; Duckitt & Fisher, 2003, as cited by Weber & Federico, 2007),
or Social Dominance Order (SDO) ideologies, in which the world is viewed as a competitive
jungle (Duckitt, 2001, as cited by Weber & Federico, 2007). RWA’s are defined by a deference to
authority figures, an endorsement of severe punishment by authority figures, and a high degree
of conventionalism (Altemeyer, 2006). SDO’s differ from RWA’s in that rather than embracing
authoritarianism as a means of protection against an out-group which threatens society, SDO’s
feel that society has already fallen and that only the strong shall survive, prompting group
domination, punishment, and humiliation against out-groups (Altemeyer, 1998). Altemeyer
(1998, as cited in Jost et al., 2003) and Pratto, Sidanious, Stallworth & Malle (1994, as cited in
Jost et al., 2003) have shown that SDO’s correlate with Republican party identification.

In response to criticism that scales of authoritarianism neglected left-wing personalities,
Rokeach (1960, as cited in Jost et al., 2003) developed a scale of dogmatism which included
measures of logically contradictory beliefs and denial of contradictions in belief systems.
According to Rokeach:

All belief-disbelief systems serve two powerful and conflicting sets of
motives at the same time: the need for a cognitive framework to know
and to understand and the need to ward off threatening aspects of
reality. To the extent that the cognitive need to know is predominant
and the need to ward off threat is absent, open systems should
result. . . . But as the need to ward off threat becomes stronger, the
cognitive need to know should become weaker, resulting in more
closed belief systems (p. 67, as quoted in Jost et al., 2003, p. 346).

Thus, closed belief systems reduce ambiguity-induced anxiety by satisfying the need to know
(Rokeach, 1960, as cited in Jost et al., 2003).

Understanding of issues and concepts is dependent upon the strength of the connotation
associated with them, as well as effectiveness of the constraints by which the referred issues and
concepts operate (Converse, 1964). In his research, Converse (1964) tests the hypothesis that if
one idea-element in the belief system should change, an individual must either change his
position on the issue or change his position on the party. Examination reveals a majority of the
population sampled are unable to express an understanding of the constraints affecting political
parties and issues without being prompted by political elites (Converse, 1964). Furthermore, the
majority of the population view the treatment they and other groups received from political
parties as their primary means of identifying parties (Converse, 1964).

Altemeyer, B. (1998). The other “authoritarian personality.” Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 47–92.
Altemeyer, B. (2006). The authoritarians. Manitoba: University of Manitoba.
Chatterjee, P. (1972). The classical balance of power theory. Journal of Peace Research, 9(1), 51-61.
Converse, P. (1964). The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In D. Apter (Ed.), Ideology and discontent (pp. 206–261). New York: Free Press.
Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. J. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129(3), 339-375.
Monroe, K.R. & Maher, K.H. (1995). Psychology and rational actor theory. Political Psychology, 16(1), 1-21.
Weber, C., & Federico, C. M. (2007). Interpersonal attachment and patterns of belief. Political Psychology, 28(4), 389-416.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lost-in-FL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-29-10 10:42 PM
Response to Reply #11
20. Lovely!
I am keeping this in my bookmark for references. Thank you very much!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-29-10 12:19 AM
Response to Original message
4. You're saying that innocent young people are "recruited" to "The Conservative Lifestyle"?
My God...what next?

Will they be allowing admitted Tories to teach in Britain's schools? Or lead youth organizations?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-29-10 12:34 AM
Response to Original message
5. Oh, hell, I've been telling y'all that for years
They're afraid of just about everything but the two things they fear the most is having somebody tell them what to do (although they desperately need it) and that it will result in inconvenience.

They fear inconvenience even more than they fear death, which is why they'll cling to things that don't work even if it kills them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hassin Bin Sober Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-29-10 12:36 AM
Response to Original message
6. That's why I call republicans "brain stems"
Well I got that from Jay Marvin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mojorabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-29-10 12:54 AM
Response to Original message
7. I don't agree with this,....novelty value?
Edited on Wed Dec-29-10 12:54 AM by Mojorabbit
The results, which will be published next year, back up a study that showed that some people were born with a "Liberal Gene" that makes people more likely to seek out less conventional political views.

The gene, a neurotransmitter in the brain called DRD4, could even be stimulated by the novelty value of radical opinionsclaimed the researchers at the University of California
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Initech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-29-10 01:02 AM
Response to Original message
8. That explains a lot about Fux News.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HCE SuiGeneris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-29-10 01:30 AM
Response to Original message
9. You SOCIALIST propagandist!!!
How DARE you? You should be shot, or be put in a private prison... away from the God-fearing, handkerchief-clutching GOOD people!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cirque du So-What Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-29-10 05:46 AM
Response to Reply #9
12. Socialist propaganda?
It's in the Torygraph, after all. The editors are either slipping or else they're fearful conservatives who want their readers to be fearful about fear itself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kip Humphrey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-29-10 06:56 AM
Response to Original message
13. When will this be recognized as a physiological disorder and is there any treatment?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mwb970 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-29-10 07:53 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. +1
Conservatism, as practiced in 2010 America, is clearly a form of mental illness and should be classified and treated as such.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-29-10 10:45 AM
Response to Reply #13
17. I think it's too common to be considered abnormal.
This sort of 'fear first, me first' attitude probably had it's advantages when we were all running around poking mammoths with sharp sticks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
treestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-29-10 10:37 AM
Response to Original message
16. But they aren't afraid when it comes to unregulated capitalism
Though maybe that is because of ignorance of what it would entail.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kablooie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-29-10 12:07 PM
Response to Original message
18. Then why aren't they afraid of retiring in poverty? It seems to be the primary conservative drive.
Live for today and ignore tomorrow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AndyTiedye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-29-10 06:30 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. That Wasn't What the Tee Vee Told Them to Be Afraid Of
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
clyrc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-29-10 11:16 PM
Response to Original message
21. Hmmmm. I am now, and always have been, very fearful
and anxious, mostly for no good reason. When I was a kid and young teenager, I had night terrors all the time, and in my late teenage years I started having frequent panic attacks. They are still a major problem for me, but the older I get the less conservative I get. This certainly isn't true for me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 18th 2024, 09:51 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC