"Low-Effort Thought Promotes Political Conservatism
Scott Eidelman1
Christian S. Crandall2
Jeffrey A. Goodman3
John C. Blanchar1
1University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, USA
2University of Kansas, Lawrence, USA
3University of Wisconsin, Eau Claire, USA
Scott Eidelman, Department of Psychology, University of Arkansas, 211 Memorial Hall, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA Email: eidelman{at}uark.edu
Abstract
The authors test the hypothesis that low-effort thought promotes political conservatism. In Study 1, alcohol intoxication was measured among bar patrons; as blood alcohol level increased, so did political conservatism (controlling for sex, education, and political identification). In Study 2, participants under cognitive load reported more conservative attitudes than their no-load counterparts. In Study 3, time pressure increased participantsâ?? endorsement of conservative terms. In Study 4, participants considering political terms in a cursory manner endorsed conservative terms more than those asked to cogitate; an indicator of effortful thought (recognition memory) partially mediated the relationship between processing effort and conservatism. Together these data suggest that political conservatism may be a process consequence of low-effort thought; when effortful, deliberate thought is disengaged, endorsement of conservative ideology increases."
The funny thing is that if conservatives disagree with this study… they prove it. It’s so perfect that it’s hilarious. Not to mention that it would kind of play into the “conservatives don’t like science” stereotype.
TLDR: Conservatives like low-effort thought and Science is witchcraft.
Perhaps it’s a common sense thing. Common sense, when a person has it, can be considered low effort. Using an example of fiscal responsibility and conservatism, one can say it’s a ‘low-effort’ idea to say…‘Don’t spend more money than you take in’. To embark upon endless overriding, complicated flights of various ideas that promote the spending of money you don’t have will land you in a heap of unmanageable and suffocating debt.
Just sayin’…‘low-effort’ thought is not necessarily a bad (or insulting) thing.
P.S. Admittedly, I did not read the detailed study because I have to go to work, not because I didn’t want to raise my mental effort in doing so! I’ll check it out later.
[quote]TLDR: Conservatives like low-effort thought and Science is witchcraft.
[/quote]
It does not say that conservatives “like” low-effort thought. It says that when people are engaged in low-effort mental processing this promotes politically conservative thoughts, not that political conservatives use low-effort thinking. No need to overstate the result to make your point.
The fact that conservatives propagate lies linking abortion to mental health difficulties (and increased breast cancer risks), and support abstinence-only education is far more damning than this study. Also cannot forget the new gem that women do not get pregnant via “legitimate” rape.
It is just sad how so many people wantonly ignore clear scientific results.
"Low-Effort Thought Promotes Political Conservatism
Scott Eidelman1
Christian S. Crandall2
Jeffrey A. Goodman3
John C. Blanchar1
1University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, USA
2University of Kansas, Lawrence, USA
3University of Wisconsin, Eau Claire, USA
Scott Eidelman, Department of Psychology, University of Arkansas, 211 Memorial Hall, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA Email: eidelman{at}uark.edu
Abstract
The authors test the hypothesis that low-effort thought promotes political conservatism. In Study 1, alcohol intoxication was measured among bar patrons; as blood alcohol level increased, so did political conservatism (controlling for sex, education, and political identification). In Study 2, participants under cognitive load reported more conservative attitudes than their no-load counterparts. In Study 3, time pressure increased participantsâ?? endorsement of conservative terms. In Study 4, participants considering political terms in a cursory manner endorsed conservative terms more than those asked to cogitate; an indicator of effortful thought (recognition memory) partially mediated the relationship between processing effort and conservatism. Together these data suggest that political conservatism may be a process consequence of low-effort thought; when effortful, deliberate thought is disengaged, endorsement of conservative ideology increases."
The funny thing is that if conservatives disagree with this study… they prove it. It’s so perfect that it’s hilarious. Not to mention that it would kind of play into the “conservatives don’t like science” stereotype.
TLDR: Conservatives like low-effort thought and Science is witchcraft.
[/quote]
Liberals cannot think except in terms of conservative versus liberal which is even LOWER-EFFORT thought.
[quote]TLDR: Conservatives like low-effort thought and Science is witchcraft.
[/quote]
It does not say that conservatives “like” low-effort thought. It says that when people are engaged in low-effort mental processing this promotes politically conservative thoughts, not that political conservatives use low-effort thinking. No need to overstate the result to make your point.
The fact that conservatives propagate lies linking abortion to mental health difficulties (and increased breast cancer risks), and support abstinence-only education is far more damning than this study. Also cannot forget the new gem that women do not get pregnant via “legitimate” rape.
It is just sad how so many people wantonly ignore clear scientific results.
jnd[/quote]
You personally know every conservative thinking person on the earth and can vouch for every one of their beliefs?
So when drinking, or pressed for time, more people own up (drop in inhibition) to conservative thoughts in a society where liberalism is over represented in media, higher education, and pop culture?! You don’t say?
@ lifty I am sure the article is aimed at the SO CALLED SOCIAL CONSERVATIVE, you know the ones that like telling other people what to do out of one side of their mouth and out of the other they are saying we need the Government out of our business
[quote]jnd wrote:
No need to overstate the result to make your point.
The fact that conservatives propagate lies linking abortion to mental health difficulties (and increased breast cancer risks), and support abstinence-only education is far more damning than this study. Also cannot forget the new gem that women do not get pregnant via “legitimate” rape.
jnd[/quote]
I love how you do, what it is you are telling the other poster not to do, one paragraph later.
It is also cute that you can paint an entire group of people with a certian political leaning with such a large brush.
But if this study makes you feel better about yourself, knock yourself out.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
@ lifty I am sure the article is aimed at the SO CALLED SOCIAL CONSERVATIVE, you know the ones that like telling other people what to do out of one side of their mouth and out of the other they are saying we need the Government out of our business[/quote]
This happens, and irks me as well.
I’m also irked by the selective outrage, and “I demand tolerance of my point of view through my intolerance of your point of view” liberals have.
I dream of a world were people argue ideas and solutions, rather than who’s kool-ade tastes better.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
@ lifty I am sure the article is aimed at the SO CALLED SOCIAL CONSERVATIVE, you know the ones that like telling other people what to do out of one side of their mouth and out of the other they are saying we need the Government out of our business[/quote]
This happens, and irks me as well.
I’m also irked by the selective outrage, and “I demand tolerance of my point of view through my intolerance of your point of view” liberals have.
I dream of a world were people argue ideas and solutions, rather than who’s kool-ade tastes better.[/quote]
[quote]jnd wrote:
No need to overstate the result to make your point.
The fact that conservatives propagate lies linking abortion to mental health difficulties (and increased breast cancer risks), and support abstinence-only education is far more damning than this study. Also cannot forget the new gem that women do not get pregnant via “legitimate” rape.
jnd[/quote]
I love how you do, what it is you are telling the other poster not to do, one paragraph later.
It is also cute that you can paint an entire group of people with a certian political leaning with such a large brush.
But if this study makes you feel better about yourself, knock yourself out.[/quote]
Not sure where I overstated anything. I was not referring to a specific study. I did not say ALL conservatives. I simply pointed out that these points of view arise from conservatives.
Are you denying that people who hold conservative values are behind the false link between abortion and breast cancer? Or that they support abstinence-only sex-ed?
Oh, I get a kick out of political groups that claim to have the market corned on scientific understanding. Enjoyed this article about that topic, politics involved with science.
[quote]jnd wrote:
No need to overstate the result to make your point.
The fact that conservatives propagate lies linking abortion to mental health difficulties (and increased breast cancer risks), and support abstinence-only education is far more damning than this study. Also cannot forget the new gem that women do not get pregnant via “legitimate” rape.
jnd[/quote]
I love how you do, what it is you are telling the other poster not to do, one paragraph later.
It is also cute that you can paint an entire group of people with a certian political leaning with such a large brush.
But if this study makes you feel better about yourself, knock yourself out.[/quote]
Not sure where I overstated anything. I was not referring to a specific study. I did not say ALL conservatives. I simply pointed out that these points of view arise from conservatives.
Are you denying that people who hold conservative values are behind the false link between abortion and breast cancer? Or that they support abstinence-only sex-ed?
jnd[/quote]
I am denying the notion that you aren’t purposely using language that paints a complex group of people with a broad brush with the intent to imply that because some have bad ideas, all must have some stake in the bad ideas.
Is there any other way to talk about groups of people without applying some type of label? If there is, I would love to hear it. It is not like any useful conversation comes from individually naming each person (that would never work).
I see that you failed to answer my question. I get it- no problem.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
@ lifty I am sure the article is aimed at the SO CALLED SOCIAL CONSERVATIVE, you know the ones that like telling other people what to do out of one side of their mouth and out of the other they are saying we need the Government out of our business[/quote]
Good luck