Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T17:28:27.307Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Conservatism and liberalism predict performance in two nonideological cognitive tasks

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 December 2017

Rodolpho Talaisys Bernabel  and
Amâncio Oliveira
Rodolpho Talaisys Bernabel*
Affiliation:
Escola Superior de Propaganda e Marketing
Amâncio Oliveira
Affiliation:
Universidade de São Paulo
*
Correspondence: Rodolpho Talaisys Bernabel, Escola Superior de Propaganda e Marketing, Rua Dr. Álvaro Alvim, 123, São Paulo, Brazil, 04018-010. Email: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Intuitive thinking would argue that political or ideological orientation does not correlate with nonpolitical decisions, and certainly not with nonideological cognitive tasks. However, that is what happens in some cases. Previous neuropolitics studies have found that liberals are more adept at dealing with novel information than conservatives. This finding suggests that conservatives and liberals possess different cognitive skills. For the purposes of this article, two studies were executed to test whether this difference remained in alternative environmental settings. To this end, two novel cognitive tasks were designed in which one type of ideology or another was privileged according to the cognitive environment created by the tasks. Experimental findings indicate that liberals committed fewer errors than conservatives in one kind of cognitive environment, while conservatives scored higher in another.

Keywords

Conservatismliberalismideologycognitionpredispositionneuropoliticsexperimental methods
Type
Articles
Information
Politics and the Life Sciences , Volume 36 , Issue 2 , Fall 2017 , pp. 49 - 59
Copyright
© Association for Politics and the Life Sciences 2017 

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.)

References

Alford, J. R., Funk, C. L., and Hibbing, J. R., “Are political orientations genetically transmitted?” American Political Science Review , 2005, 99(2): 153–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, K., Alford, J. R., Hatemi, P. K., Eaves, L. J., Funk, C. L., and Hibbing, J. R., “Biology, ideology, and epistemology: How do we know political attitudes are inherited and why should we care?” American Journal of Political Science , 2012, 56(1): 12–33.Google Scholar
Dawes, C. T., Loewen, P. J., and Fowler, J. H., “Social preferences and political participation,” Journal of Politics , 2011, 73(3): 845–856.Google Scholar
Hibbing, J. R., Smith, K. B., and Alford, J. R., Predisposed: Liberals, Conservatives, and the Biology of Political Differences (New York: Routledge, 2014).Google Scholar
Jones, K. L., Noorbaloochi, S., Jost, J. T., Bonneau, R., Nagler, J., and Tucker, J., Liberal and conservative values: What we can learn from congressional tweets, Political Psychology, published online March 29, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alford, Funk, and Hibbing, pp. 153–167.Google Scholar
Weissflog, M., Choma, B. L., Dywan, J., van Noordt, S. J., and Segalowitz, S. J., “The political (and psychological) divide: Political orientation, performance monitoring, and the anterior cingulate response,” Social Neuroscience , 2013, 8(5): 434–447.Google Scholar
Schreiber, D., Fonzo, G., Simmons, A. N., Dawes, C. T., Flagan, T., Fowler, J. H., and Paulus, M. P., “Red brain, blue brain: Evaluative processes differ in democrats and republicans,” PLOS ONE , 2013, 8(2): e52970.Google Scholar
Kanai, R., Feilden, T., Firth, C., and Rees, G., “Political orientations are correlated with brain structure in young adults,” Current Biology , 2011, 21(8): 677–680.Google Scholar
Öhman, A., “The role of the amygdala in human fear: Automatic detection of threat,” Psychoneuroendocrinology , 2005, 30(10): 953–958.Google Scholar
Öhman, A., Carlsson, K., Lundqvist, D., and Ingvar, M., “On the unconscious subcortical origin of human fear,” Physiology & Behavior , 2007, 92: 180–185.Google Scholar
Zald, D. H., “The human amygdala and the emotional evaluation of sensory stimuli,” Brain Research Reviews , 2003, 41(1): 88–123.Google Scholar
Liddell, B. J., Brown, K. J., Kemp, A. H., Barton, M. J., Das, P., Peduto, A., Gordon, E., and Williams, L. M., “A direct brainstem-amygdala-cortical ‘alarm’ system for subliminal signals of fear,” NeuroImage , 2005, 24(1): 235–243.Google Scholar
Carter, C. S., Braver, T. S., Barch, D. M., Botvinick, M. M., Noll, D., and Cohen, J. D., “Anterior cingulate cortex, error detection, and the online monitoring of performance,” Science , 1998, 280(5364): 747–749.Google Scholar
Opris, I. and Casanova, M. F., “Prefrontal cortical minicolumn: From executive control to disrupted cognitive processing,” Brain , 2014, 137: 1863–1875.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gehring, W. J. and Willoughby, A. R., “The medial frontal cortex and the rapid processing of monetary gains and losses,” Science , 2002, 295(5563): 2279–2282.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Downar, J., Crawley, A. P., Mikulis, D. J., Karen, Y., and Davis, D., “The effect of task relevance on the cortical response to changes in visual and auditory stimuli: An event-related fMRI study,” NeuroImage , 2001, 14(6): 1256–1267.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carraro, L., Castelli, L., and Macchiella, C., “The automatic conservative: Ideology-based attentional asymmetries in the processing of valenced information,” PLOS ONE , 2011, 6(11): e26456.Google Scholar
Dodd, M. D., Hibbing, J. R., and Smith, K. B., “The politics of attention: Gaze-cuing effects are moderated by political temperament,” Attention, Perception and Psychophysics , 2011, 73(1): 24–29.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilson, G. D., Ausman, J., and Mathews, T. R., “Conservatism and art preferences,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 1973, 25(2): 286–288.Google Scholar
Amodio, D. M., Jost, J. T., Master, S. L., and Yee, C. M., “Neurocognitive correlates of liberalism and conservatism,” Nature Neuroscience , 10(10): 1246–1247.Google Scholar
Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., and Sulloway, F. J., “Political conservatism as motivated social cognition,” Psychological Bulletin , 2003, 129(3): 339–375.Google Scholar
Jost, J. T. and Amodio, D. M., “Political ideology as motivated social cognition: Behavioral and neuroscientific evidence,” Motivation and Emotion , 2012, 36(1): 55–64.Google Scholar
Carney, D. R., Jost, J. T., Gosling, S. D., and Potter, J., “The secret lives of liberals and conservatives: Personality profiles, interaction styles, and things they leave behind,” Political Psychology , 2008, 29(6): 807–840.Google Scholar
Gerber, A. S., Huber, G. A., Doherty, D., Dowling, C. M., and Ha, S. E., “Personality and political attitudes: Relationships across issue domains and political contexts,” American Political Science Review , 2010, 104(1): 111–133.Google Scholar
Jost, J. T., “The end of the end of ideology,” American Psychologist , 2006, 61(7): 651–670.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Amodio et al., pp. 1246–1247.Google Scholar
Amodio et al., pp. 1246–1247.Google Scholar
Amodio et al., pp. 1246–1247.Google Scholar
Nieuwenhuis, S., Yeung, N., van den Wildenberg, W., and Ridderinkhof, R., “Electrophysiological correlates of anterior cingulate function in a go/no-go task: Effects of response conflict and trial type frequency,” Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience , 2003, 3(1): 17–26.Google Scholar
Amodio et al., pp. 1246–1247.Google Scholar
Amodio et al., pp. 1246–1247.Google Scholar
Amodio et al., pp. 1246–1247.Google Scholar
Amodio et al., pp. 1246–1247.Google Scholar
Shook, N. J. and Fazio, R. H., “Political ideology, exploration of novel stimuli, and attitude formation,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology , 2009, 45(4): 995–998.Google Scholar