Bias and Political Leanings

[Darryl G. Thomas]

Study Ties Political Leanings to Hidden Biases

By Shankar Vedantam
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, January 30, 2006; A05

Put a group of people together at a party and observe how they behave. Differently than when they are alone? Differently than when they are with family? What if they're in a stadium instead of at a party? What if they're all men?

The field of social psychology has long been focused on how social environments affect the way people behave. But social psychologists are people, too, and as the United States has become increasingly politically polarized, they have grown increasingly interested in examining what drives these sharp divides: red states vs. blue states; pro-Iraq war vs. anti-Iraq war; pro-same-sex marriage vs. anti-same-sex marriage. And they have begun to study political behavior using such specialized tools as sophisticated psychological tests and brain scans.

"In my own family, for example, there are stark differences, not just of opinion but very profound differences in how we view the world," said Brenda Major, a psychologist at the University of California at Santa Barbara and the president of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, which had a conference last week that showcased several provocative psychological studies about the nature of political belief.

The new interest has yielded some results that will themselves provoke partisan reactions: Studies presented at the conference, for example, produced evidence that emotions and implicit assumptions often influence why people choose their political affiliations, and that partisans stubbornly discount any information that challenges their preexisting beliefs.

Emory University psychologist Drew Westen put self-identified Democratic and Republican partisans in brain scanners and asked them to evaluate negative information about various candidates. Both groups were quick to spot inconsistency and hypocrisy -- but only in candidates they opposed.

When presented with negative information about the candidates they liked, partisans of all stripes found ways to discount it, Westen said. When the unpalatable information was rejected, furthermore, the brain scans showed that volunteers gave themselves feel-good pats -- the scans showed that "reward centers" in volunteers' brains were activated. The psychologist observed that the way these subjects dealt with unwelcome information had curious parallels with drug addiction as addicts also reward themselves for wrong-headed behavior.

Another study presented at the conference, which was in Palm Springs, Calif., explored relationships between racial bias and political affiliation by analyzing self-reported beliefs, voting patterns and the results of psychological tests that measure implicit attitudes -- subtle stereotypes people hold about various groups.

That study found that supporters of President Bush and other conservatives had stronger self-admitted and implicit biases against blacks than liberals did.

"What automatic biases reveal is that while we have the feeling we are living up to our values, that feeling may not be right," said University of Virginia psychologist Brian Nosek, who helped conduct the race analysis. "We are not aware of everything that causes our behavior, even things in our own lives."

Brian Jones, a spokesman for the Republican National Committee, said he disagreed with the study's conclusions but that it was difficult to offer a detailed critique, as the research had not yet been published and he could not review the methodology. He also questioned whether the researchers themselves had implicit biases -- against Republicans -- noting that Nosek and Harvard psychologist Mahzarin Banaji had given campaign contributions to Democrats.

"There are a lot of factors that go into political affiliation, and snap determinations may be interesting for an academic study, but the real-world application seems somewhat murky," Jones said.

Nosek said that though the risk of bias among researchers was "a reasonable question," the study provided empirical results that could -- and would -- be tested by other groups: "All we did was compare questions that people could answer any way they wanted," Nosek said, as he explained why he felt personal views could not have influenced the outcome. "We had no direct contact with participants."

For their study, Nosek, Banaji and social psychologist Erik Thompson culled self-acknowledged views about blacks from nearly 130,000 whites, who volunteered online to participate in a widely used test of racial bias that measures the speed of people's associations between black or white faces and positive or negative words. The researchers examined correlations between explicit and implicit attitudes and voting behavior in all 435 congressional districts.

The analysis found that substantial majorities of Americans, liberals and conservatives, found it more difficult to associate black faces with positive concepts than white faces -- evidence of implicit bias. But districts that registered higher levels of bias systematically produced more votes for Bush.

"Obviously, such research does not speak at all to the question of the prejudice level of the president," said Banaji, "but it does show that George W. Bush is appealing as a leader to those Americans who harbor greater anti-black prejudice."

Vincent Hutchings, a political scientist at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, said the results matched his own findings in a study he conducted ahead of the 2000 presidential election: Volunteers shown visual images of blacks in contexts that implied they were getting welfare benefits were far more receptive to Republican political ads decrying government waste than volunteers shown ads with the same message but without images of black people.

Jon Krosnick, a psychologist and political scientist at Stanford University, who independently assessed the studies, said it remains to be seen how significant the correlation is between racial bias and political affiliation.

For example, he said, the study could not tell whether racial bias was a better predictor of voting preference than, say, policy preferences on gun control or abortion. But while those issues would be addressed in subsequent studies -- Krosnick plans to get random groups of future voters to take the psychological tests and discuss their policy preferences -- he said the basic correlation was not in doubt.

"If anyone in Washington is skeptical about these findings, they are in denial," he said. "We have 50 years of evidence that racial prejudice predicts voting. Republicans are supported by whites with prejudice against blacks. If people say, 'This takes me aback,' they are ignoring a huge volume of research."

[Dr Dave]

"...partisans stubbornly discount any information that challenges their preexisting beliefs."

After all these years on this board, I am shocked, shocked, to discover that this is so.


"...The analysis found that substantial majorities of Americans, liberals and conservatives, found it more difficult to associate black faces with positive concepts than white faces -- evidence of implicit bias..."

It would be interesting to see a similar study of black Americans. I wonder whether they'd be equally biased. My guess--and it is only a guess--is that they would not be. It would be nice to know, though, wouldn't it?

It is no surprise to see that Republicans are the most racist category among American whites. (cue for our right-wing buddies: "The study is flawed!")

It is pretty sad to see that racism is still so thoroughly entrenched among white people, regardless of political affiliation.

[Slurpy]

Originally Posted by Darryl G. Thomas

Study Ties Political Leanings to Hidden Biases

Studies presented at the conference, for example, produced evidence that emotions and implicit assumptions often influence why people choose their political affiliations, and that partisans stubbornly discount any information that challenges their preexisting beliefs.

We needed a study to determine that??

EDIT: Oops..just saw Doc's reply. Nevermind.

[Darryl G. Thomas]

Doc,

I wondered about a black study of bias vs. political leanings myself. A study has probably been done, I just haven't heard about it.

Maybe it's because blacks vote for whites all the time? It's rare when there's a chance to vote for a black Senator or President. Maybe at the House of Reps. level or local contests where you have a white candidate vs. a black one you coud get some decent stats.

[Enforcer]

I have trouble believing that a minority voter can see the image of a white politician, and all the things an image of a "white politician" represents to him, and not have an unfavorable gut level reaction. I mean, I have an unfavorable reaction to it, and I'm not as far on the outside of the system as the minority voter is.

[rollhead]

Well, I know that I overlook a lie about a blowjob.

And, Monte, for example, overlooks a lie that led to the deaths of 2,000+ Americans and -- how many? -- 40,000 Iraqis.

So, I guess that makes us even.

[Scott Dolan]

Oh holy shit, rollie.

You're just being lazy today ever since you got your ass whomped.

[rollhead]

Originally Posted by Scott Dolan

Oh holy shit, rollie.

You're just being lazy today ever since you got your ass whomped.

nah, Scottie, I just don't think a BJ is that big a deal.

I mean, why would anyone want to be the most powerful man in the world if he can't get a good blow job once in awhile?

I know you wouldn't take the job.

[Gordon B]

Originally Posted by rollhead

nah, Scottie, I just don't think a BJ is that big a deal.

I mean, why would anyone want to be the most powerful man in the world if he can't get a good blow job once in awhile?

I know you wouldn't take the job.

Rolly, you don't even pretend to be honest here. I'm sure you know that the impeachment charge was not blowjobs.

[Dr Dave]

Originally Posted by rollhead

Well, I know that I overlook a lie about a blowjob.

And, Monte, for example, overlooks a lie that led to the deaths of 2,000+ Americans and -- how many? -- 40,000 Iraqis.

So, I guess that makes us even.

I'm sorry, but baiting Monte is not helpful here.

[bluenoter]

Originally Posted by Gordon B

Rolly, you don't even pretend to be honest here. I'm sure you know that the impeachment charge was not blowjobs.

Yes, he does, and in a later post, he writes

Originally Posted by rollhead

Well, I know that I overlook a lie about a blowjob.

And, Monte, for example, overlooks a lie that led to the deaths of 2,000+ Americans and -- how many? -- 40,000 Iraqis.

So, I guess that makes us even.

Hence a slogan that may not cut any ice with you but does with many:

"No one died when Clinton lied."

[Scott Dolan]

That one's almost as old, and lame as the term housewives.

Please, PLENTY of people in foreign countries died under Clintons watch. Hell, I'd like to know who the last President was that didn't order some type of military action where innocent civilians died.

[Dr Dave]

Fa chrissakes, let it go! Don't you ever get tired of this stupid tit-for-tat?

Darryl: You make an interesting point. There are 39 members of the Congressional Black Caucus; maybe there is data available from their various election campaigns.

[Scott Dolan]

No, what I get tired of is these stupid fucking empty phrases that constantly get spouted as though they are the whole truth that trumps everything else.

It's silly and shows the slogan slinger doesn't pay much attention beyond the headlines.

[Dr Dave]

Originally Posted by Scott Dolan

No, what I get tired of is these stupid fucking empty phrases that constantly get spouted as though they are the whole truth that trumps everything else.

It's silly and shows the slogan slinger doesn't pay much attention beyond the headlines.

PRETTY PLEASE???

[Scott Dolan]

Pretty please what?

[lynn]

Terri Gross had an interesting show a while back where they discussed racism and it seems that in times of economic pressure racism seems to increase or at lease becomes more eveident as people start protecting thier turf. With all the layoff, increases in the cost of living, political extremism, minority groups, including women, start to feel the heat. Plenty of policies have been put into place within the last 5 years that are examples of this. Affirmative action is a victim of this assault.

[Gordon B]

Originally Posted by bluenoter

Yes, he [B][FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]does

Of course he knew that the articles of impeachment were not drawn over blowjobs.
That doesn't stop him from repeating the lie over and over again.

[Dennis Gonzalez]

Li-yer Li-yer Pants on Fi-yer!
Nanny Nanny Boo-Boo...

[Dennis Gonzalez]

"That study found that supporters of President Bush and other conservatives had stronger self-admitted and implicit biases against blacks than liberals did."

No. No! De-ah Gawd! No! Ar kuvver's blowed.

[Scott Dolan]

Originally Posted by Dennis Gonzalez

Li-yer Li-yer Pants on Fi-yer!
Nanny Nanny Boo-Boo...

Are you talkin to me?

Are you, talkin to me?

[Dr Dave]

No he's not talking to you. Why would anyone talk to you? Lately you seem capable of jeering, but that's about it.

[Scott Dolan]

Oh Dave, come off it already.

This is almost as laughable as your "he's an asshole 24/7" comment.

Matter of fact, weren't you just agreeing with me about something the other day? Actually, we've agreed on several things recently.

Yeah, I get lazt and/or bored sometimes, but enough of this bullshit about that being all I'm capable of.

[Gary Sisco]

We should have Clinton sainted already, the way people talk about him. I will always loathe the man for his absolutely savage policies toward handicapped people, not to mention is random fire use of cruise missiles for making domestic political points. Those years are someone else's nostalgia.

Truth is, in my case, I share a politics with no one, today. If anything I guess I'd believe with Jefferson that a democratic republic such as was envisioned for the US by people of his views, depends upon a politically educated, economically independent citizenry (he saw it in the yeoman farmers of his time, an economic class that has disappeared forever) willing to fight at any time to maintain its liberty, including when necessary against its own gubmint.

That something doesn't exist today, and the republic has rotted to the extent that it doesn't. It's in putrefaction today.