Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: Researchers help define what makes a political conservative  (Read 870 times)

_BP_

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 2594
  • Think. Wait. Fast.
    • View Profile
Researchers help define what makes a political conservative
« on: August 14, 2006, 11:23:07 AM »
http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2003/07/22_politics.shtml

BERKELEY Politically conservative agendas may range from supporting the Vietnam War to upholding traditional moral and religious values to opposing welfare. But are there consistent underlying motivations?

Four researchers who culled through 50 years of research literature about the psychology of conservatism report that at the core of political conservatism is the resistance to change and a tolerance for inequality, and that some of the common psychological factors linked to political conservatism include:

Fear and aggression

Dogmatism and intolerance of ambiguity

Uncertainty avoidance

Need for cognitive closure

Terror management
"From our perspective, these psychological factors are capable of contributing to the adoption of conservative ideological contents, either independently or in combination," the researchers wrote in an article, "Political Conservatism as Motivated Social Cognition," recently published in the American Psychological Association's Psychological Bulletin.

Assistant Professor Jack Glaser of the University of California, Berkeley's Goldman School of Public Policy and Visiting Professor Frank Sulloway of UC Berkeley joined lead author, Associate Professor John Jost of Stanford University's Graduate School of Business, and Professor Arie Kruglanski of the University of Maryland at College Park, to analyze the literature on conservatism.

The psychologists sought patterns among 88 samples, involving 22,818 participants, taken from journal articles, books and conference papers. The material originating from 12 countries included speeches and interviews given by politicians, opinions and verdicts rendered by judges, as well as experimental, field and survey studies.

Ten meta-analytic calculations performed on the material - which included various types of literature and approaches from different countries and groups - yielded consistent, common threads, Glaser said.

The avoidance of uncertainty, for example, as well as the striving for certainty, are particularly tied to one key dimension of conservative thought - the resistance to change or hanging onto the status quo, they said.

The terror management feature of conservatism can be seen in post-Sept. 11 America, where many people appear to shun and even punish outsiders and those who threaten the status of cherished world views, they wrote.

Concerns with fear and threat, likewise, can be linked to a second key dimension of conservatism - an endorsement of inequality, a view reflected in the Indian caste system, South African apartheid and the conservative, segregationist politics of the late Sen. Strom Thurmond (R-South S.C.).

Disparate conservatives share a resistance to change and acceptance of inequality, the authors said. Hitler, Mussolini, and former President Ronald Reagan were individuals, but all were right-wing conservatives because they preached a return to an idealized past and condoned inequality in some form. Talk host Rush Limbaugh can be described the same way, the authors commented in a published reply to the article.

This research marks the first synthesis of a vast amount of information about conservatism, and the result is an "elegant and unifying explanation" for political conservatism under the rubric of motivated social cognition, said Sulloway. That entails the tendency of people's attitudinal preferences on policy matters to be explained by individual needs based on personality, social interests or existential needs.

The researchers' analytical methods allowed them to determine the effects for each class of factors and revealed "more pluralistic and nuanced understanding of the source of conservatism," Sulloway said.

While most people resist change, Glaser said, liberals appear to have a higher tolerance for change than conservatives do.

As for conservatives' penchant for accepting inequality, he said, one contemporary example is liberals' general endorsement of extending rights and liberties to disadvantaged minorities such as gays and lesbians, compared to conservatives' opposing position.

The researchers said that conservative ideologies, like virtually all belief systems, develop in part because they satisfy some psychological needs, but that "does not mean that conservatism is pathological or that conservative beliefs are necessarily false, irrational, or unprincipled."

They also stressed that their findings are not judgmental.

"In many cases, including mass politics, 'liberal' traits may be liabilities, and being intolerant of ambiguity, high on the need for closure, or low in cognitive complexity might be associated with such generally valued characteristics as personal commitment and unwavering loyalty," the researchers wrote.

This intolerance of ambiguity can lead people to cling to the familiar, to arrive at premature conclusions, and to impose simplistic cliches and stereotypes, the researchers advised.

The latest debate about the possibility that the Bush administration ignored intelligence information that discounted reports of Iraq buying nuclear material from Africa may be linked to the conservative intolerance for ambiguity and or need for closure, said Glaser.

"For a variety of psychological reasons, then, right-wing populism may have more consistent appeal than left-wing populism, especially in times of potential crisis and instability," he said.

Glaser acknowledged that the team's exclusive assessment of the psychological motivations of political conservatism might be viewed as a partisan exercise. However, he said, there is a host of information available about conservatism, but not about liberalism.

The researchers conceded cases of left-wing ideologues, such as Stalin, Khrushchev or Castro, who, once in power, steadfastly resisted change, allegedly in the name of egalitarianism.

Yet, they noted that some of these figures might be considered politically conservative in the context of the systems that they defended. The researchers noted that Stalin, for example, was concerned about defending and preserving the existing Soviet system.

Although they concluded that conservatives are less "integratively complex" than others are, Glaser said, "it doesn't mean that they're simple-minded."

Conservatives don't feel the need to jump through complex, intellectual hoops in order to understand or justify some of their positions, he said. "They are more comfortable seeing and stating things in black and white in ways that would make liberals squirm," Glaser said.

He pointed as an example to a 2001 trip to Italy, where President George W. Bush was asked to explain himself. The Republican president told assembled world leaders, "I know what I believe and I believe what I believe is right." And in 2002, Bush told a British reporter, "Look, my job isn't to nuance."
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
1776 TO 2006

juliemccoy

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1632
  • Treat??
    • View Profile
Re: Researchers help define what makes a political conservative
« Reply #1 on: August 14, 2006, 11:32:22 AM »
So the article is saying conservatives like straight answers.
Vanderbilt 2010

SplitFinger

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1066
  • I'm a real pretend lawyer now!
    • View Profile
Re: Researchers help define what makes a political conservative
« Reply #2 on: August 14, 2006, 12:50:09 PM »
Whether it's based in reality or not.

Real answers are rarely "straight answers".
Emory '09

LSN

philibusters

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1076
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Researchers help define what makes a political conservative
« Reply #3 on: September 13, 2006, 01:16:15 PM »
This sounds a little weak to me, I think somebody could easily do a study that comes up with the exact opposite results.  The researchers who did this study pretty much wasted their time.
2008 graduate of William and Mary Law School

SplitFinger

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1066
  • I'm a real pretend lawyer now!
    • View Profile
Re: Researchers help define what makes a political conservative
« Reply #4 on: September 14, 2006, 12:41:41 PM »
I bet you couldn't.
Emory '09

LSN

jorge

  • Guest
Re: Researchers help define what makes a political conservative
« Reply #5 on: September 19, 2006, 12:52:42 AM »
When Hobbes wrote "fear and I were born twins together" he wasn't just talking about the circumstances of his birth.

philibusters

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1076
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Researchers help define what makes a political conservative
« Reply #6 on: September 22, 2006, 12:30:29 AM »
I don't see it, but maybe it depends on how you define political conserative.

To me political conserative best describes somebody who supports a bundle of substantive policies that encompass economic, social, political (as in who gets power) goals and world view.

Conseratives have a number of tatics they use to accomplish their goals, however we shouldn't confuse the policies (the means) they use to acccomplish their goals with the actual goals themselves.

For example the article cites fear of change as a psychological trait of conseratives, but do conseratives really fear change or is that more of an end to reach their goal.  For example, in business practices conseratives can be quite innovative pushing for change if it will give them an edge in the marketplace.  Furthermore, conseratives could been seen as a group of special interests-in which case no duh they would oppose change-they have vested interests- they are have's in a world of have's and have's not, resistance to change is not an innate psychological trait, but merely effective policy.

The same can be said for intolerance of ambiguity.  Generally conseratives judges before bright line rules, but if the substantive goal is better served by balancing, then that is of course where they will support in that instance.  Miranda is an excellent example of it, Miranda could be a fairly bright line rule, but conseratives have riddled it with exceptions and have tried to apply totality of the circumstance tests to those exceptions and eventually the law becomes very very ambigious.  I think certainly conseratives prefer the law that way, then to having confessions be thrown out of court because the police didn't follow the correct procedures.

  I don't think they naturally have a preference for bright line rules, though one could argue they do on philsophical grounds and probably many conseratives would make that argument, I think they tend to graviate that way because more or often than not it is what furthers their substantive goals.

In the end I think the article mainly was used to reinforce stereotypes.  It is "us" versus "them."  Honestly, if you look at some liberal blogs on line that just go off on bush daily, you will see, liberals have the exact same psychological propesities.
2008 graduate of William and Mary Law School

SplitFinger

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1066
  • I'm a real pretend lawyer now!
    • View Profile
Re: Researchers help define what makes a political conservative
« Reply #7 on: September 23, 2006, 10:33:43 PM »

or not.
Emory '09

LSN