Intelligence, prejudice, and right wing attitudes.

[barts]

Published in Psychological Science, the abstract for Bright Minds and Dark Attitudes:Lower Cognitive Ability Predicts Greater Prejudice Through Right-Wing Ideology and Low Intergroup Contact, reads,

...cognitive abilities have been largely ignored as explanations of prejudice. We proposed and tested mediation models in which lower cognitive ability predicts greater prejudice, an effect mediated through the endorsement of right-wing ideologies (social conservatism, right-wing authoritarianism) and low levels of contact with out-groups. In an analysis of two large-scale, nationally representative United Kingdom data sets (N = 15,874), we found that lower general intelligence (g) in childhood predicts greater racism in adulthood, and this effect was largely mediated via conservative ideology. A secondary analysis of a U.S. data set confirmed a predictive effect of poor abstract-reasoning skills on antihomosexual prejudice, a relation partially mediated by both authoritarianism and low levels of intergroup contact. All analyses controlled for education and socioeconomic status. Our results suggest that cognitive abilities play a critical, albeit underappreciated, role in prejudice. Consequently, we recommend a heightened focus on cognitive ability in research on prejudice and a better integration of cognitive ability into prejudice models.

Not surprising this study has gained some currency in the press. From Intelligence Study Links Low I.Q To Prejudice, Racism, Conservatism,


[Photo source]

Are racists dumb? Do conservatives tend to be less intelligent than liberals? A provocative new study from Brock University in Ontario suggests the answer to both questions may be a qualified yes. ...

Dr. Gordon Hodson, a professor of psychology at the university and the study's lead author, said the finding represented evidence of a vicious cycle: People of low intelligence gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies, which stress resistance to change and, in turn, prejudice, he told LiveScience.

Why might less intelligent people be drawn to conservative ideologies? Because such ideologies feature "structure and order" that make it easier to comprehend a complicated world, Dodson said. "Unfortunately, many of these features can also contribute to prejudice," he added.

Dr. Brian Nosek, a University of Virginia psychologist, echoed those sentiments. "Reality is complicated and messy," he told The Huffington Post in an email. "Ideologies get rid of the messiness and impose a simpler solution. So, it may not be surprising that people with less cognitive capacity will be attracted to simplifying ideologies."

But Nosek said less intelligent types might be attracted to liberal "simplifying ideologies" as well as conservative ones.
In any case, the study has taken the internet by storm, with some outspoken liberals saying that their it validates their suspicions about conservatives and conservatives arguing that the research has been misinterpreted.

[Apeman81]

KKK? Wasn't that made up of Southern Democrats? Robert Byrd anyone?

[grandpa]

Wasn't that made up of Southern Democrats?

Nope. Persians.

Grandpa h.

[barts]

KKK? Wasn't that made up of Southern Democrats? Robert Byrd anyone?

I've only read the abstract of the study and press reports of interviews with the authors, but it seems to me that the issue wasn't about political party affiliation, but rather the apparent correlation between lower intelligence, prejudice, and conservative ideologies. It's likely these personal attributes can be found in any political party or organization.

[Trojan_Ripper]

"Reality is complicated and messy," he told The Huffington Post in an email. "Ideologies get rid of the messiness and impose a simpler solution. So, it may not be surprising that people with less cognitive capacity will be attracted to simplifying ideologies”.

But Nosek said less intelligent types might be attracted to liberal "simplifying ideologies" as well as conservative ones.

Are these guys’ liberal or conservative? They can’t seem to make up their mind. Or are they just “racist and dumb” like the KKK…. because they didn’t realize that African Americans have the lowest IQ test results?

Intelligence has been defined in different ways, including the abilities for abstract thought, understanding, communication, reasoning, learning, retaining, planning, and problem solving…. Or… cognitive capacity like Hodson and Nosek speak of.

Yes, when it comes to listening to this rubbish, I can see how “Reality is complicated and messy” to someone like Nosek….as he stated…and Hodson as lead author needs a little more cognitive skill in picking who will be echoing his sentiments in published works from now on.

So what should we take from this? That African Americans are dumb, prejudiced, and conservatives, with some type of winged attitude? Phiffitttt.

It's likely these personal attributes can be found in any political party or organization.

Agreed.

[ironeagle]

Um to be honest I find this very difficult to take seriously. A great deal of educated people are prejudice, I've seen some dumb people who love all people, so I don't know if I'd take this too seriously.

[Angry Citizen]

KKK? Wasn't that made up of Southern Democrats? Robert Byrd anyone?

Y'know, I hate it when people try to pull this shit on others. Are you really unaware of the realignment which occurred after a) the New Deal, and b) the Civil Rights Act? First the Democrats lost the southern fiscal conservatives, then they lost the southern social conservatives, all in less than forty years. The small government, god-'n'-guns crowd has existed since the 18th century, and has been known by various names. In the 18th century, they were the anti-Federalists. In the 19th, they were the Democrats. In the 20th and 21st, they are the Republicans. Is it really that mysterious to you when you look at the old voting patterns? The North used to vote solid Republican, and the South used to be the Democratic enclave. Then realignment happens and the shift reverses. Or do you believe that the South was once a bunch of sissy city liberals looking for hope, change, progress, and a government check? Give me a break...

[lsbskins1]

KKK? Wasn't that made up of Southern Democrats? Robert Byrd anyone?

Strom Thurmond anyone?

Here is the funny thing...both Strom and Byrd began their careers as Democrats. Strom filibustered the Civil Rights Act, hid an interracial child for his entire life and never once said he was wrong or sorry...and switched to the Republican party. Byrd remained a Democrat and stood up and said he was stupid for ever joining the KKK and was ashamed of his previous thinking. Notice a difference?

[Trojan_Ripper]

Strom Thurmond anyone?

Here is the funny thing...both Strom and Byrd began their careers as Democrats. Strom filibustered the Civil Rights Act, hid an interracial child for his entire life and never once said he was wrong or sorry...and switched to the Republican party. Byrd remained a Democrat and stood up and said he was stupid for ever joining the KKK and was ashamed of his previous thinking. Notice a difference?

Uhmm….that racists can have sex with another race? That racist’s can change parties? That racist’s can admit they were wrong but stay with their party?

The only difference I noticed was that EVERY racist can change no matter what fucking party they affiliate with?

[lsbskins1]

Uhmm….that racists can have sex with another race? That racist’s can change parties? That racist’s can admit they were wrong but stay with their party?

The only difference I noticed was that EVERY racist can change no matter what fucking party they affiliate with?

Does it hurt to force yourself to ignore the obvious?

One of them changed nothing but his party. The other, even if we can't know his mind, at least said publicly, mea culpa fashion, that he had been wrong. Only one of them presented us with any evidence of change of attitude. They both may have remained actual racists, but only one of them stayed in the party that's membership within required a public declaration of disavowing racist attitudes. Which party WAS that, Dear Sir? And just to be clear, projecting your fault onto others is not the same as ridding yourself of the fault.

[Quark]

Are these guys’ liberal or conservative? They can’t seem to make up their mind.

Why must you polarize ideas with political labels? The authors of the article observed data and attempted to draw a conclusion. They published the paper with their explanation for the observations and as an argument about how the two are connected. The idea that because a conclusion goes against something you like or don't it must be an attack from a side against another is foolish.

I'll briefly touch upon the other bits in your post; IQ tests do not measure actual intelligence, the ideals of our political parties and greatly changed since Robert Byrd and can almost be summarized with a switch of political labels, and reality very much is complicated without those ideological pillars you seem to be hanging on to.

Um to be honest I find this very difficult to take seriously. A great deal of educated people are prejudice, I've seen some dumb people who love all people, so I don't know if I'd take this too seriously.

"Roughly 30% of American adults are obese."

I'm not sure I believe that... I've seen plenty of Americans who weren't fat and also plenty of fat people who weren't American. My experiences represent statistics and fact, not those silly facts or statistics.

[Trojan_Ripper]

Does it hurt to force yourself to ignore the obvious?

One of them changed nothing but his party. The other, even if we can't know his mind, at least said publicly, mea culpa fashion, that he had been wrong. Only one of them presented us with any evidence of change of attitude. They both may have remained actual racists, but only one of them stayed in the party that's membership within required a public declaration of disavowing racist attitudes. Which party WAS that, Dear Sir? And just to be clear, projecting your fault onto others is not the same as ridding yourself of the fault.

How did I ignore the oblivious Isbskins? What “obvious” was in your post?

I told you exactly what I saw by your statement…. which you reiterated again. You state that “even if we can’t know his mind” ….you then go on in the next sentence and say he “presented us with evidence of change of attitude”? How do we know that? Are we to take him (and by this) everyone’s apology for misdeeds on any given subject just because they apologize? There is a lot of that “I’m sorry, I’ll never do that again” bullshit floating around from very evil people… just to gain respect and admiration again.

All I see is a an avoidance and ignoring of well known history with words and no substance, or reason, for calling out another party that could no where come close to the past beliefs of those calling them out….in this day and age.

It’s not even funny that some people like to cloak and cover up their evil racist past and don’t want to admit how they finally compromised to look more like Unionists, even though they still held on to their views.

At least I can admit that I’m sure both parties have racist people amongst their ranks; but it’s just not a political point today that some want to think or portray it to be.