2minkey
bootlicker
well here's a revealing look at conservatives. i'm not sure i'm totally in agreement with everything here - especially given that psychology is such a theoretically underfed discipline - but it sure is thought-provoking...
http://psychologytoday.com/articles/pto-20061222-000001.xml
key quotes would include...
"People who were conservative at age 23 had been described by their teachers as easily victimized, easily offended, indecisive, fearful, rigid, inhibited, and vulnerable at age 3. The reason for the difference, the Blocks hypothesized, was that insecure kids most needed the reassurance of tradition and authority, and they found it in conservative politics."
"People have two modes of thought," concludes Solomon. "There's the intuitive gut-level mode, which is what most of us are in most of the time. And then there's a rational analytic mode, which takes effort and attention."
then there's a nice article that in my opinion utterly lacks any solid methodological grounds. and i'd be laughing at it if it were not for the fact that several of its assertions are - based on primary observation - dead on, balls accurate.
abstract is...
Analyzing political conservatism as motivated social cognition integrates theories of personality (authoritarianism,dogmatism–intolerance of ambiguity), epistemic and existential needs (for closure, regulatory focus, terror management), and ideological rationalization (social dominance, system justification). A meta-analysis (88 samples, 12 countries, 22,818 cases) confirms that several psychological variables predict political conservatism: death anxiety (weighted mean r .50); system instability (.47);
dogmatism–intolerance of ambiguity (.34); openness to experience (–.32); uncertainty tolerance (–.27); needs for order, structure, and closure (.26); integrative complexity (–.20); fear of threat and loss (.18); and self-esteem (–.09). The core ideology of conservatism stresses resistance to change and justification of inequality and is motivated by needs that vary situationally and dispositionally to manage uncertainty and threat.
(caution - pdf link...)
http://www.wam.umd.edu/~hannahk/bulletin.pdf
also found some counterpoint to all this. he attacks underlying research methods, which would matter more if, again, many of the above assertions were not dead on, balls accurate. i mean, golly, we don't need them fancy researchers telling us nothin' when we got common sense.
http://www.ironshrink.com/articles/070301_curing_conservatism.php
http://psychologytoday.com/articles/pto-20061222-000001.xml
key quotes would include...
"People who were conservative at age 23 had been described by their teachers as easily victimized, easily offended, indecisive, fearful, rigid, inhibited, and vulnerable at age 3. The reason for the difference, the Blocks hypothesized, was that insecure kids most needed the reassurance of tradition and authority, and they found it in conservative politics."
"People have two modes of thought," concludes Solomon. "There's the intuitive gut-level mode, which is what most of us are in most of the time. And then there's a rational analytic mode, which takes effort and attention."
then there's a nice article that in my opinion utterly lacks any solid methodological grounds. and i'd be laughing at it if it were not for the fact that several of its assertions are - based on primary observation - dead on, balls accurate.
abstract is...
Analyzing political conservatism as motivated social cognition integrates theories of personality (authoritarianism,dogmatism–intolerance of ambiguity), epistemic and existential needs (for closure, regulatory focus, terror management), and ideological rationalization (social dominance, system justification). A meta-analysis (88 samples, 12 countries, 22,818 cases) confirms that several psychological variables predict political conservatism: death anxiety (weighted mean r .50); system instability (.47);
dogmatism–intolerance of ambiguity (.34); openness to experience (–.32); uncertainty tolerance (–.27); needs for order, structure, and closure (.26); integrative complexity (–.20); fear of threat and loss (.18); and self-esteem (–.09). The core ideology of conservatism stresses resistance to change and justification of inequality and is motivated by needs that vary situationally and dispositionally to manage uncertainty and threat.
(caution - pdf link...)
http://www.wam.umd.edu/~hannahk/bulletin.pdf
also found some counterpoint to all this. he attacks underlying research methods, which would matter more if, again, many of the above assertions were not dead on, balls accurate. i mean, golly, we don't need them fancy researchers telling us nothin' when we got common sense.
http://www.ironshrink.com/articles/070301_curing_conservatism.php
