sevfiv Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 This has been coming through several newswires - a team including John Alford from Rice conducted a study about startle responses and political identification:People who startle easily in response to threatening images or loud sounds seem to have a biological predisposition to adopt conservative political positions on many hot-button issues, according to unusual new research published yesterday.The finding suggests that people who are particularly sensitive to signals of visual or auditory threats also tend to adopt a more defensive stance on political issues, such as immigration, gun control, defense spending and patriotism. People who are less sensitive to potential threats, by contrast, seem predisposed to hold more liberal positions on those issues.The study takes the research a step beyond psychology by suggesting that innate physiological differences among people may help shape their startle responses and their political inclinations. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...8091802265.htmlhttp://www.abcnews.go.com/Health/MindMoodN...2571&page=1http://www.newsweek.com/id/159540http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtm.../scitory118.xml Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
memebag Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 Sweet. Conservatives are a bunch of scaredy cats.Boo! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HtownWxBoy Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 I believe it, conservatives are known for being little wussies afraid of everything past their white picket fence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbigtex56 Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 I jump and twitch like crazy at loud, sudden sounds. It's not fun. It cannot be helped. But now I'm stuck with being conservative, too?NOOOOOOO!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
editor Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 So, I guess everything else on Earth has already been studied. I wonder if any of my federal tax dollars were used for this study. How's that cure for cancer coming along, Rice? Not yet? You're too busy testing what kinds of people get startled easily? Oh, well I guess that's important, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevfiv Posted September 19, 2008 Author Share Posted September 19, 2008 ^Yeah, that ran through my head, too...but faculty can research a lot as long as they teach their classes!Fwiw, Rice, while not huuuge in cancer research, is doing some good work in cancer research involving bioengineering/nanotechnology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNiche Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 The finding suggests that people who are particularly sensitive to signals of visual or auditory threats also tend to adopt a more defensive stance on political issues, such as immigration, gun control, defense spending and patriotism. People who are less sensitive to potential threats, by contrast, seem predisposed to hold more liberal positions on those issues.The study takes the research a step beyond psychology by suggesting that innate physiological differences among people may help shape their startle responses and their political inclinations. Isn't this a lot like saying that people that frighten easily also tend to be more responsive to appeals to fear? No kidding. You don't say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KinkaidAlum Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 Laugh now you Godless liberals, but the evil doers are amongst us! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
20thStDad Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 Based on my own limited observation I would disagree with their findings. This is silly. If anything it's the wicked left who are impulsive and reactionary, often taking a cause to the Nth degree before anything is proven (see: California). It's the conservatives who don't move at all when there is a loud noise, because they are crotchety and don't like to keep their hearing aids in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HtownWxBoy Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 Laugh now you Godless liberals, but the evil doers are amongst us! Who is that, the blacks?... the gays?... maybe those scary mexicans? Don't conservatives believe all of these groups want to eat their children? It's the conservatives who don't move at all when there is a loud noise, because they are crotchety and don't like to keep their hearing aids in. spot on! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crunchtastic Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 Don't conservatives believe all of these groups want to eat their children? I hear they taste like chicken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNiche Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 Based on my own limited observation I would disagree with their findings. This is silly. If anything it's the wicked left who are impulsive and reactionary, often taking a cause to the Nth degree before anything is proven (see: California). It's the conservatives who don't move at all when there is a loud noise, because they are crotchety and don't like to keep their hearing aids in. The study would appear to have been conducted on an issue-by-issue basis, rather than just asking people whether they were conservative or liberal, overall. Fundamentally it is very difficult to say what actually is conservative. Even self-described conservatives often disagree with and dislike various factions that are also self-described as conservative. And being a self-described conservative or liberal certainly is correlated with, but is certainly not the same as being a self-described member of a political party or as being totally adherent to that party's platform--even though many people, no doubt including respondents to (and interpreters of) an academic study, often confuse that concept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UrbaNerd Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 If anything, this "fight or flight" response may be beneficial to the continuation of a gene line. In animal behaviour the reaction would give the specimen a greater chance of being able to pass his/her genes on, since he/she isn't dead, and would have the opportunity to reproduce later on. Thus, those who posses a more "developed" fight/flight response would win out in the evolutionary battle against those with a less developed biological reaction. Couple this along with other parental instincts and behaviours, and this may explain the higher birthrate among conservatives./social Darwinism/Tounge in cheek Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texas Wahoo Posted September 22, 2008 Share Posted September 22, 2008 I believe it, conservatives are known for being little wussies afraid of everything past their white picket fence. And yet all the political commercials here in virginia are trying to scare me into thinking McCain wants to send all of the jobs overseas. Be afraid! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.