Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T11:22:51.498Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genes, Ideology, and Sophistication

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 March 2021

Nathan P. Kalmoe Open the ORCID record for Nathan P. Kalmoe [Opens in a new window]  and
Martin Johnson
Nathan P. Kalmoe*
Affiliation:
Manship School of Mass Communication and Department of Political Science, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Martin Johnson
Affiliation:
Manship School of Mass Communication and Department of Political Science, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA
*
*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Twin studies function as natural experiments that reveal political ideology’s substantial genetic roots, but how does that comport with research showing a largely nonideological public? This study integrates two important literatures and tests whether political sophistication – itself heritable – provides an “enriched environment” for genetic predispositions to actualize in political attitudes. Estimates from the Minnesota Twin Study show that sociopolitical conservatism is extraordinarily heritable (74%) for the most informed fifth of the public – much more so than population-level results (57%) – but with much lower heritability (29%) for the public’s bottom half. This heterogeneity is clearest in the Wilson–Patterson (W-P) index, with similar patterns for individual index items, an ideological constraint measure, and ideological identification. The results resolve tensions between two key fields by showing that political knowledge facilitates the expression of genetic predispositions in mass politics.

Keywords

Twin studiesheritabilityideologyknowledgenatural experiment
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Experimental Political Science , Volume 9 , Issue 2 , Summer 2022 , pp. 255 - 266
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Experimental Research Section of the American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

The data employed in this project were collected with the financial support of the National Science Foundation in the form of SES-0721378, PI: John R. Hibbing; Co-PIs: John R. Alford, Lindon J. Eaves, Carolyn L. Funk, Peter K. Hatemi, and Kevin B. Smith, and with the cooperation of the Minnesota Twin Registry at the University of Minnesota, Robert Krueger and Matthew McGue, Directors. The data, code, and any additional materials required to replicate all analyses in this article are available at the Journal of Experimental Political Science Dataverse within the Harvard Dataverse Network, at: https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/NBIWOA. Due to Martin Johnson’s passing during revisions, we are unable to post the replication files for the main OpenMX analysis, which we could not find among his files. There are no conflicts of interest to report.

References

Achen, Christopher H. 1975. Mass Political Attitudes and the Survey Response. American Political Science Review 69(4): 1218–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arceneaux, Kevin, Johnson, Martin, and Maes, Hermine H.. 2012. The Genetic Basis of Political Sophistication. Twin Research & Human Genetics 15(1): 34–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Alford, John R., Funk, Carolyn, and Hibbing, John R.. 2005. Are Political Orientations Genetically Transmitted? American Political Science Review 99(2): 153–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen, Rodden, Jonathan, and Snyder, James M. Jr. 2008. The Strength of Issues: Using Multiple Measures to Gauge Preference Stability, Ideological Constraint, and Issue Voting. American Political Science Review 102(2): 215–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakker, Bert N., Schumacher, Gijs, Gothreau, Claire, and Arceneaux, Kevin. 2020. Conservatives and Liberals have Similar Physiological Responses to Threats. Nature: Human Behaviour 4: 613–21.Google ScholarPubMed
Berinsky, Adam J. 2008. In Time of War: Understanding American Public Opinion from World War II to Iraq. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Broockman, David E. 2016. Approaches to Studying Policy Representation. Legislative Studies Quarterly 41(1): 181–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charney, Evan. 2008. Genes and Ideologies. Perspectives on Politics 6(2): 299–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, Marty, Karol, David, Noel, Hans, and Zaller, John. 2008. The Party Decides: Presidential Nominations Before and After Reform. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Converse, Philip E. 1964. The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics. In Ideology and Discontent, ed., Apter, D. E. New York: Free Press of Glencoe.Google Scholar
Converse, Philip E. 2000. Assessing the Capacity of Mass Electorates. Annual Review of Political Science 3: 331–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delli Carpini, Michael X., and Keeter, Scott. 1996. What Americans Know About Politics and Why It Matters. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Eaves, Lindon J., and Eysenck, H. J.. 1974. Genetics and the Development of Social Attitudes. Nature, 249: 288–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eaves, Lindon J., Martin, Nicholas G., Heath, Andrew C., Schieken, Richard, Meyer, Joanne, Silberg, Judy, Neale, Michael, and Corey, Linda. 1997. Age Changes in the Causes of Individual Differences in Conservatism. Behavioral Genetics 27(2): 121–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fazekas, Zoltán, and Littvay, Levente. 2015. The Importance of Context in the Genetic Transmission of U.S. Party Identification. Political Psychology 36(4): 361–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeder, Sean, Lenz, Gabriel S., and Turney, Shad. 2019. The Importance of Knowing ‘What Goes With What’: Reinterpreting the Evidence on Policy Attitude Stability. Journal of Politics 81(1): 274–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hatemi, Peter K., Byrne, Enda, and McDermott, Rose. 2012. Introduction: What is a ‘gene’ and Why Does it Matter for Political Science? Journal of Theoretical Politics 24(3): 305–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hatemi, Peter K., Funk, Carolyn L., Medland, Sarah E., Maes, Hermine M., … Eaves, Lindon J.. 2009. Genetic and Environmental Transmission of Political Attitudes Over a Life Time. Journal of Politics 71(3): 1141–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hatemi, Peter K., Hibbing, John R., Medland, Sarah E., Keller, Matthew C., … Eaves, Lindon J.. 2010. Not by Twins Alone: Using the Extended Family Design to Investigate Genetic Influence on Political Beliefs. American Journal of Political Science 54(3): 798–814.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hatemi, Peter K., Medland, Sarah E., Klemmensen, Robert, Oskarsson, Sven, … Martin, Nicholas G.. 2014. Genetic Influences on Political Ideologies: Twin Analyses of 19 Measures of Political Ideologies from Five Democracies and Genome-Wide Findings from Three Populations. Behavioral Genetics 44: 282–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kalmoe, Nathan P. 2020. Uses and Abuses of Ideology in Political Psychology. Political Psychology 41: 771–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kalmoe, Nathan P. 2020. Replication Data for ‘Genes, Ideology, & Sophistication’, https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/NBIWOA, Harvard Dataverse, V1, UNF:6:aoY/dVqFcC0AQ6iuGmT/OQ== [fileUNF]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ksiazkiewicz, Aleksander, Klemmensen, Robert, Dawes, Christopher T., Christensen, Kaare, … Nørgaard, Asbjørn Sonne. 2020. Sources of Stability in Social and Economic Ideological Orientations: Cohort, Context, and Construct Effects. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, edz047.Google Scholar
Kinder, Donald R. and Kalmoe, Nathan P.. 2017. Neither Liberal nor Conservative: Ideological Innocence in the American Public. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lenz, Gabriel S. 2012. Follow the Leader? How Voters Respond to Politicians’ Policies and Performance. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lykken, D. T., Bouchard, T. J. Jr., McGue, M., and Tellegen, A.. 1990. The Minnesota Twin Family Registry: Some initial findings. Acta Geneticae Medicae et Gemellogicae 39: 35–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Martin, Nicholas G., Eaves, Lindon J., Heath, Andrew C., Jardine, R., Feingold, L. M., and Eysenck, H. J.. 1986. Transmission of Social Attitudes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 88(12): 4364–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neale, M. C., Hunter, M. D., Pritikin, J. N., Zahery, M., Brick, T. R., Surrealism, R. M., Estabrook, R., Bates, T. C., Maes, H. H., and Boker, S. M. 2016. OpenMx 2.0: Extended Structural Equation and Statistical Modeling. Psychometrika 81(2): 535–49.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oxley, Douglas R., Smith, Kevin B., Alford, John R., Hibbing, Matthew V., … Hibbing, John R.. 2008. Political Attitudes Vary with Physiological Traits. Science 321(5896): 1667–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shadish, William R., Cook, Thomas D., and Campbell, Donald T.. 2002. Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference. New York, NY: Houghton Mifflin Company.Google Scholar
Smith, Kevin B., Alford, John R., Hatemi, Peter K., Eaves, Lyndon J., Funk, Carolyn, and Hibbing, John R.. 2012. Biology, Ideology, and Epistemology: How do We Know Political Attitudes are Inherited and Why Should We Care? American Journal of Political Science 56(1): 17–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Silventoinen, Karri. 2003. Determinants of Variation in Adult Body Height. Journal of Biosocial Science 35(2): 263–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, Kevin B., Oxley, Douglas R., Hibbing, Matthew V., Alford, John R., and Hibbing, John R.. 2011. Linking Genetics and Political Attitudes: Reconceptualizing Political Ideology. Political Psychology 32(3): 369–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suhay, Elizabeth, Kalmoe, Nathan P., and McDermott, Christa. 2008. Why Twin Studies are Problematic for the Study of Political Ideology: Rethinking Are Political Orientations Genetically Transmitted? Presented at the Annual Meeting of the International Society for Political Psychology, Portland, OR.Google Scholar
Tucker-Drob, Elliot M., Briley, Daniel A., and Paige Harden, K.. 2013. Genetic and Environmental Influences on Cognition Across Development and Context. Current Directions in Psychological Science 22(5): 349–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verhulst, Brad, Eaves, Lindon J., and Hatemi, Peter K.. 2011. Correlation Not Causation: The Relationship Between Personality Traits and Political Ideologies. American Journal of Political Science 56(1): 34–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaller, John. 1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Kalmoe and Johnson supplementary material

Online Appendix

Download Kalmoe and Johnson supplementary material(File)
File 63.5 KB