Left or Right wing? Its all biology- not politics

[Michaelangelica]

I've often expected this
So it's no good arguing; its just the middle 5% that change govenments
Now we need to study their brain chemistry.

Study finds left-wing brain, right-wing brain
Even in humdrum nonpolitical decisions, liberals and conservatives literally think differently, researchers show.
By Denise Gellene, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
September 10, 2007
Exploring the neurobiology of politics, scientists have found that liberals tolerate ambiguity and conflict better than conservatives because of how their brains work.

In a simple experiment reported todayin the journal Nature Neuroscience, scientists at New York University and UCLA show that political orientation is related to differences in how the brain processes information.

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.

The results show "there are two cognitive styles -- a liberal style and a conservative style," said UCLA neurologist Dr. Marco Iacoboni, who was not connected to the latest research.

Participants were college students

Study finds left-wing brain, right-wing brain - Los Angeles Times

[Moontanman]

That's all we needed, now the Conservatives will try to genetically engineer liberals out of existence or even worse keep liberal babies from being born. I can see it now, two conservative parents are in doctors office and the doctor says "I'm sorry Mr. and Mrs. Neocon, the genetic tests show your baby will be a liberal." the woman sobs into her husbands shoulder and the husbands says, "don't worry dear, it will be a quick and painless procedure" and the wife says "but what will our friends at church say?" he says, "they'll understand, we just can't risk bringing a liberal into the world, it would be cruel to the child, no normal child would want to play with it, where would it live or work, we just can't allow it to happen"

[modest]

Originally Posted by Michaelangelica

I've often expected this
So it's no good arguing; its just the middle 5% that change govenments
Now we need to study their brain chemistry.

Study finds left-wing brain, right-wing brain - Los Angeles Times

This is the same article that questor pointed out in Brain Wiring Redux. I looked in depth at the study the article was talking about and it is not nearly convincing. I'll quote myself from the other thread:

Originally Posted by modest

Your first post is one sentence long and doesn't explain anything. It does, however, have a link to a real media source

<...>

Which talks about a Los Angeles times story found here:

Study finds left-wing brain, right-wing brain

Which talks about a study published in Nature Neuroscience. It doesn't name the study, but fortunately gives the name of the lead author: David Amodio of NYU. Looking him up, I found his website with a list of publications:

David Amodio

From this I deduced that the study you're refering to is titled: Neurocognitive correlates of liberalism and conservatism 2007.

<...>

available free and online:

http://www.psych.nyu.edu/amodiolab/A...re%20Neuro.pdf

Originally Posted by modest

OK, alright, I read it cover to cover. All 2 pages - and I even looked at the graph

Rather than writing a big, long summary and critique I'll just say: this study had nothing to do with genetic predisposition toward political ideology or left brain / right brain tendencies. If you read it and want to discuss particulars I'll be around. Otherwise, I'll not get into what I thought of it.

~modest

Originally Posted by modest

There are some odd things about questor's study that I link in post 14:

http://www.psych.nyu.edu/amodiolab/A...re%20Neuro.pdf

Looking at the graph, it has 7 people who identify themselves as conservative and none of them say they're strongly conservative. It has 29 liberal participants and four with no preference. Why so many more liberals in the stuy? More importantly - why so few participants at all? This type of study is prone to error. What if someone is not as conservative / liberal as they say they are? What if they used to be liberal, but as society has changed they now consider themselves conservative?

In a study with so many subjective variables it's a must to have a large sample which this study doesn't have. It also doesn't give other data on the participants. What if the conservatives in the study have a higher mean age than the liberals? The results of the study are far more likely to represent age in my mind because it basically measures what happens in someone's brain when they push a button repeatedly and occasionally push the wrong button.

The results could be biased by which group of people play more video games or which have better visual acuity. There is no control on this study - no way to know if they really are testing something that has anything to do with political ideology. The proper thing to do would be a blind test where they get a few hundred participants and run the test without asking them what their ideology is (or even what the test is testing). When the test is over they try to guess the participants' ideology and see if the test is correct. But they didn't do this.

They didn't set up controls or assure any kind of fair sample. No, I don't like that study at all. Way too many assumptions. If you read the introduction which questor really likes, you see way too many assumptions. It's like the author was trying to get some quick newspaper headlines. I mean - It's a 2 page study - with graphs!

~modest

I hope you don't take this wrong Michaelangelica. I don't think there's anything necessarily wrong with the article you link. But, I have looked into it and I think the study it's talking about is very weak and the conclusions seem at odds with the results which I think makes it dishonest.

~modest

[Thunderbird]

Michaelangelica, Great find.
modest, If you have spent much time around conservatives you should know this is true. What percentage artist are liberals. What percentage of accountants are conservatives. I knew this as a fact before the study.


Moonman...

[Michaelangelica]

modest
Fine I should have said " suspected" not expected.
I will have a look at the original research and your critique.
Being a G&S Fan I have always loved

"How Nature always does contrive--Fal, lal, la!
That every boy and every gal
That's born into the world alive
Is either a little Liberal
Or else a little Conservative!"
Gilbert and Sullivan, Act II, Iolanthe:
Interestingly they all turn into fairies at the end of the Opera

I just thought it might be fun with all the Yanks focussing on the Presidential Race.

I did some preliminary research on this in a 3rd year Politics course on 'authoritarianism in political parties'. I never completed the research but I learnt an awful lot about what it meant to be Labor of Libera in Australia. It was some education going to different party meetings.
If you put all the parties together you would get a continuium from extreme fascist right to extreme left.- and that would be no perfect indication of what party they belonged to!

It is interesting though, how some attitudes and beliefs are immune to change or logical argument. I guess in the States you get a sense of belonging by declaring your party aligence. It would be considered rude here to ask someone which way the voted or will vote. Huge turnouts of party faithful rarely occur except on election night when the beer and snags are free.
Still most elections would be decided here with the 5-10% "swinging" voter. (the Donkey vote is about 5%). Most people see themselves "born into" a party. There is also an element of class snobbishness as well.


Mootanman you should be writing for stand up comics LOL

Another interesting study

New Scientist reports on the findings of a study on the impact of genes on religious inclinations

Genes may help determine how religious a person is, suggests a new study of US twins. And the effects of a religious upbringing may fade with time.

Until about 25 years ago, scientists assumed that religious behaviour was simply the product of a person’s socialisation - or “nurture”. But more recent studies, including those on adult twins who were raised apart, suggest genes contribute about 40% of the variability in a person’s religiousness.

But it is not clear how that contribution changes with age. A few studies on children and teenagers - with biological or adoptive parents - show the children tend to mirror the religious beliefs and behaviours of the parents with whom they live. That suggests genes play a small role in religiousness at that age.

Now, researchers led by Laura Koenig, a psychology graduate student at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis, US, have tried to tease apart how the effects of nature and nurture vary with time. Their study suggests that as adolescents grow into adults, genetic factors become more important in determining how religious a person is, while environmental factors wane.

The study can be found in Journal of Personality (vol 73, p 471)

The title of the paper is:

Genetic and Environmental Influences on Religiousness: Findings for Retrospective and Current Religiousness Ratings

by Laura B. Koenig, Matt McGue, Robert F. Krueger, Thomas J. Bouchard Jr

Genes contribute to religious inclination - The Panda's Thumb

[Michaelangelica]

Yes modest very small sample indeed agreed. (Far too smal.l I am surprised the stas worked. I guess the computer does it all these days.)

How were they picked from the population? Did I miss that? Psy 101 Students again?

I am surprised by their statement that self rating correlated with 85% of actual vote. Amazing. I doubt if that would work here. (That would be an interesting experiment if you could trust people) Self rating is very dubious way to go

[modest]

Originally Posted by Michaelangelica

modest
Fine I should have said " suspected" not expected.

Don't get me wrong - I don't think it's an odd thing to expect - I just don't think that study did anything right toward proving or even implying that it's true.

Originally Posted by Michaelangelica

Yes modest very small sample indeed agreed. (Far too smal.l I am surprised the stas worked. I guess the computer does it all these days.)

How were they picked from the population? Did I miss that? Psy 101 Students again?

I don't recall it saying how they were chosen. Neither did it say what age each participant was or any other information that would give a control. For example, if the conservatives were mostly older than the liberals then this test was most likely just testing reaction time differences in age. I believe there are many things this test could have been indicating other than political ideology. It's like picking out 30 people and finding out 8 of the taller ones are conservative and concluding that political ideology is genetically controlled by height.

~modest

[Zythryn]

I don't find the findings all that surprising (that liberals and conservatives tend to have different traits).
What I question is any conclusion that political affiliation is a result of these traits rather than the traits being a result of political affiliation.
It also does nothing to explain the many people what identify partially with both, or many political parties.

[Michaelangelica]

Originally Posted by Zythryn

What I question is any conclusion that political affiliation is a result of these traits rather than the traits being a result of political affiliation.

It also does nothing to explain the many people what identify partially with both, or many political parties.

good points. chicken or egg?
I was surprised when I did apolitical affiliations test/questionaire last year to find my third choice was a right wing Christian party.. friends consoled my shattered ego by explaining they have progressive social policies (Family First!!!)
I mean I do like the Sermon on the Mount but. . . .

I do notice that usually people here tend to vote as there parents did.
If your mum hunts moose you do too? So the chicken comes first.

That might be changing it SEEMS a lot of the the young are voting "Green".
This is about as left wing as you can get here in a party with a more than one policy platform.

Aside: (I always give the Marijuana party my sympathy vote. This is possible in a preferential system as you vote gets re-allocated to number 2 if the MJ party does not get in.)
BTW I have never smoked MJ. I am waiting for one of you to send me some seed!)

Although I was very surprised with the only seriously, filthy-rich and international-jet-setting executive I know said he was going to vote Green in his homeland in Germany
I was really surprised and asked why?- with my jaw on the ground.
He said "You have to see what they have done to the country" he said,
"as you approach some German towns there is just a huge plume of smoke rising in the air.. . .
You have to vote green."

[questor]

Actually, it's quite easy to determine who is liberal or conservative. Just a few questions about important issues. Age, height, gender doesn't matter.
You can tell by reading posts on this site. This is a philosophical difference and does not always change with age, although the young are usually more liberal and the older are more conservative. Hooray for maturity and experience!
Is it possible that all thought is generated from the initial neural mass one inherits and even though influenced by the environment is still filtered through those genetically contolled neurons?