Study: Liberals are Smarter?

[Lanny_MacDonald]

I was hoping this article would be ready for download, but it appears Nature Neuroscience has a one year hold on their articles. Either that, or my institutional access has not paid for the up-to-minute publications. That is a possibility. Anyone else with research library access able to take a crack at this? Should be accessible via Pro-Quest if you have it.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

I was hoping this article would be ready for download, but it appears Nature Neuroscience has a one year hold on their articles. Either that, or my institutional access has not paid for the up-to-minute publications. That is a possibility. Anyone else with research library access able to take a crack at this? Should be accessible via Pro-Quest if you have it.

I can get it. Is there a way to send you a .pdf? I don't suppose Calgarypuck PM supports attachments...

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Thanks Iowa. Got a copy.

[Thor]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Thanks Iowa. Got a copy.

I would love a copy if you can, thor25@shaw.ca

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

BTW... hard to have bias come into play in this study.

Of course this study is biased. It is well known that reality has a liberal bias. Hence the need for Conservapedia.

[badnarik]

Just read it. The study only had 8 people who claimed to be more conservative than liberal, and the people being tested were likely politically clueless college students. Nevertheless I sent a copy to a friend who is a neuropsychologist (and a liberal) to see what he thinks.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by SebC

Hence the need for Conservapedia.

Holy moly (no pun intended).

[SebC]

LOL...

Originally Posted by Conservapedia

New junk science report says 'liberals are more flexible in their thinking' and conservatives ' more rigid and closed-minded, less tolerant of ambiguity'.

[Bobblehead]

I find it funny that in a time when western society is becoming more and more like the society Orwell described in 1984, there is a George Orwell quote on the front page.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

I find it funny that in a time when western society is becoming more and more like the society Orwell described in 1984, there is a George Orwell quote on the front page.

Well, Orwell was famously kind of conservative, so it's easy to see how he could get adopted as a kind of icon for them.

I think it's weirder that on their front page they are actually trying to defend Joseph McCarthy. They might have picked someone a little less... I don't know... corrupt and evil?

[octothorp]

It's fun with Conservapedia to just click random page and see what right-wing/christian references are worked into various articles... for example, on jellyfish:

In 1965, the film The Sting of Death (a reference to 1 Corinthians 15:56) was released, documenting in dramatic fashion the life and death of jellyfish in the ocean.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by badnarik

Just read it. The study only had 8 people who claimed to be more conservative than liberal, and the people being tested were likely politically clueless college students. Nevertheless I sent a copy to a friend who is a neuropsychologist (and a liberal) to see what he thinks.

It's a small sample size no matter what the cohort is. But I talked to my wife (who is a neuroscientist) and she doesn't think much of their methodology in the first place--basically thinks their conclusion is a vast overreach from what are really pretty limited data.

[llama64]

Anyone drawing conclusions from this study is demonstrating a lack of critical thinking on a level that scares me.

1 - They asked people to self identify their political leanings. There's a highly empirical gauge!
2 - Extremely low sample size, and based mostly in the university world.
3 - well, the study explains this:

“Lead author David Amodio […] cautioned that the study looked at a narrow range of human behavior and that it would be a mistake to conclude that one political orientation was better. The tendency of conservatives to block distracting information could be a good thing depending on the situation, he said.”

The ability to filter information enables one to definitively act in response. In many situations, that is more important then understanding things from all angles. To attempt that liberals are generally smarter then conservatives only demonstrates an arrogance born of ignorance.

In no way does this study indicate that one side is smarter then the other. All it does is demonstrate that some people are more open to new ideas because their brains react differently when receiving and processing information. It then tries to loosely correlate this with political affiliation to see if there might be something worth investigating. Without seeing the actual study, it seems like there may be something to this, but I highly doubt it has anything to do with intelligence.

It would be interesting to see the results of this study include general IQ and EQ numbers for each member of the sample group.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by llama64

It would be interesting to see the results of this study include general IQ and EQ numbers for each member of the sample group.

No, that would be far, far worse. IQ has been, as far as I know, thoroughly debunked as a measure of anything.

The fact is, it's impossible to ascertain anything valuable about "intelligence" as long as you don't really know what it is.

Furthermore, why even compare conservatives with liberals? To do so assumes that they are discrete cohorts with differences in how their brains work. I can think of no better way to promote a polarized political debate than to say "conservatives are from mars and liberals are from venus." It's a bit silly.

[badnarik]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

No, that would be far, far worse. IQ has been, as far as I know, thoroughly debunked as a measure of anything.

The fact is, it's impossible to ascertain anything valuable about "intelligence" as long as you don't really know what it is.

Furthermore, why even compare conservatives with liberals? To do so assumes that they are discrete cohorts with differences in how their brains work. I can think of no better way to promote a polarized political debate than to say "conservatives are from mars and liberals are from venus." It's a bit silly.

I was going to say the same things about IQ tests and trying to define intelligence.

I still would like to see the questionnaire they used. If they could get a better sample and a better measure of where a person is on the political spectrum, they could have a really interesting, although maybe dangerous study.

Are you saying you're silly?

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by badnarik

Are you saying you're silly?

I neither did the study nor endorsed its methods in any way. If pressed, I'd probably admit that sometimes I think cognitive science is silly.

In truth, I posted this because of William Saletan's response, which I find to be the most interesting part. The study itself is easily dismissed as not very meaningful. But he attacks its methods in a way that is a little off-key, especially for him--hes usually quite bright. The moment I read it, something bothered me, and I think I finally figured it out: he seems to accept the study's premise that adaptability is liberal, while truculence is conservative. Shouldn't he have just debunked THAT idea first? If he did, the rest would fall like a house of cards. Instead, he claims the tudy is rigged and then ends the article with a very defensive-sounding rant, using a weird rhetorical "we" and "you"--as though he were addressing an audience of sneering academic liberals who just called him stupid.

[llama64]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

No, that would be far, far worse. IQ has been, as far as I know, thoroughly debunked as a measure of anything.

The fact is, it's impossible to ascertain anything valuable about "intelligence" as long as you don't really know what it is.

Furthermore, why even compare conservatives with liberals? To do so assumes that they are discrete cohorts with differences in how their brains work. I can think of no better way to promote a polarized political debate than to say "conservatives are from mars and liberals are from venus." It's a bit silly.

That's the idea of the study, as far as I've seen. This polarized debate between the left and right has existed for most of human history, in one form or another. Finding out if there is something neurological behind the two sides is of some scientific interest I think.

I'm aware of the deficiencies related to IQ. EQ combined with IQ helps normalize it for most people, and I thought it would make an interesting correlation if they were included in the study.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by llama64

I'm aware of the deficiencies related to IQ. EQ combined with IQ helps normalize it for most people, and I thought it would make an interesting correlation if they were included in the study.

Forgive my ignorance--I'm a literary type. What's EQ?

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

Forgive my ignorance--I'm a literary type. What's EQ?

Also called Emotional IQ, or emotional intelligence,

"Emotional Intelligence" refers to the capacity for recognising our own feelings and those of others, for motivating ourselves, and for managing emotions well in ourselves and in our relationship. It describes abilities distinct from, but complementary to academic intelligence, the purely cognitive capacities measured by IQ. Many people who are book-smart but lack EQ end up working for people who have lower IQs than them but who excel in EQ skills.

It also measures social agility.

[llama64]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

Forgive my ignorance--I'm a literary type. What's EQ?

It's an attempt to judge the emotional intelligence of a subject. Basically it helps gauge how a person reacts when dealing with emotion. Think of it as a way to measure maturity. Where IQ deals with cognitive functions (analytical skills, memory), EQ deals with how people cope with stress, manage social situations, employ intuition.

Both measures are error prone and suffer flaws. But I think both combined give a decent benchmark for measurement.