Red brains vs. blue brains

"Neurological divide seen between liberals and conservatives" in The Sacramento Bee, Monday, September 10, 2007 by Carrie Peyton Dahlberg, Bee Staff Writer.
See below the intro for details about a study of liberal and conservative responses in a scientific study.

I have been visiting Daily Kos daily for several months.  The article I am going to describe was in the Sacramento Bee this morning.  Despite my limited abilities on the computer, I wanted to share this article.  Sorry I do not know how to link to it or blockquote it.

The study's lead author, David Amodio, a professor of psychology at New York University, is quoted as saying "political attitudes are dispositional in nature, almost more like personalities.  They're not necessarily a choice."

45 college students were selected along a political spectrum from liberal to conservative.  Using a cap to measure electrical activities in a part of the brain that measures conflict monitoring, students were asked to press a button that coordinated with letters flashed from a screen.  The speed of the process set up conflict.  

During the difficult high speed part of the test, "self-described conservatives pressed the button anyway nearly half the time - an error rate of 44 out of 100.  Liberals fumbled about a third of the time, with an error rate of 34 out of 100."

There is another measurable brain wave the occurs when a subject successfully resists pushing the button in error.  That signal could be associated with learning from mistakes.  Both responses tested better in liberal subjects.

"Conservatives tend to be conscientious, consistent and structured while liberals lean toward open-minded, creative and messy" said New York University psychology professor John Jost in an e-mail.

 

•  That's why liberals like the netroots

  Political blogs are less structured and messy than talk radio. That's one reason why liberals are more comfortable with the netroots than conservatives are. On the other hand, conservatives like talk radio better because it's more structured and an authoritarian figure (the host) sets the agenda.

  by BlueTide on Mon Sep 10, 2007 at 10:32:57 AM PDT

•  already diaried

  but that last line wasn't in the other diary.

  please add more detail.

  by hypersphere01 on Mon Sep 10, 2007 at 10:33:32 AM PDT

  •  Please add more detail

    This article was from the Sacramento Bee by a staff writer.  The other article was from the LA Times.  The remainder of that paragraph said that John Jost "believes this new research may be the first to also document different activity in a specific area of the brain".

    by LillithMc on Mon Sep 10, 2007 at 11:18:33 AM PDT

    •  oh, i can barely remember

      but i do seem to remember reading other studies.

      by hypersphere01 on Mon Sep 10, 2007 at 11:27:06 AM PDT

    •  The information

      in the earlier diary was identified in the Fresno BEE as coming from the Chicago Tribune.  The Tribune article included results of other research and views of people who did not perform this study.  A commenter on the earlier diary added this to the discussion:

      The L.A. Times has this story:

         Participants were college students whose politics ranged from "very liberal" to "very conservative." They were instructed to tap a keyboard when an M appeared on a computer monitor and to refrain from tapping when they saw a W.

         M appeared four times more frequently than W, conditioning participants to press a key in knee-jerk fashion whenever they saw a letter.

         Each participant was wired to an electroencephalograph that recorded activity in the anterior cingulate cortex, the part of the brain that detects conflicts between a habitual tendency (pressing a key) and a more appropriate response (not pressing the key).

         Liberals had more brain activity and made fewer mistakes than conservatives when they saw a W, researchers said. Liberals and conservatives were equally accurate in recognizing M...

      They also did the experiment in reverse, perhaps realizing the "W" might have an emotional resonance for the politically aware.  :)

         Frank J. Sulloway, a researcher at UC Berkeley's Institute of Personality and Social Research who was not connected to the study, said the results "provided an elegant demonstration that individual differences on a conservative-liberal dimension are strongly related to brain activity."

         Analyzing the data, Sulloway said liberals were 4.9 times as likely as conservatives to show activity in the brain circuits that deal with conflicts, and 2.2 times as likely to score in the top half of the distribution for accuracy...

      Please note that the liberals were more perceptive and more often correct.

      While the L.A. Times piece also quotes someone claiming possible disadvantages for thinking "liberally":  

        1. I would note the absence of any "mirror" laboratory findings (such as any parts of conservatives' brains being more active than liberals'). The results solely show increased brain activity among the liberals.  

        2. I cannot think of many situations where failing to perceive and respond to a critical change is of any practical advantage. (And such failure, raised to a matter of principle, is the absolute hallmark of the current, ruinous Administration.)

        3. Since the group were college students, the findings do not necessarily hold for all conservative individuals, some of whom have thoughtful and nuanced views. It probably tells us, mostly, about the knee-jerk "conservatives" of today.  

      BTW, to blockquote, you can highlight a paragraph and press the Blockquote button.

      by ybruti on Mon Sep 10, 2007 at 12:12:59 PM PDT

•  So that means that...

  Conservatives have shit for brains right ;  )

  by bigpappa10834 on Mon Sep 10, 2007 at 10:50:30 AM PDT

  •  No

    but it can be spun whichever way is beneficial. Conservatives are either loyal and steadfast(from a positive spin) or rigid and unable to change(from a negative spin). Likewise, liberals are adaptive, and adept at changing to suit circumstances(positive) or unable to stick to a plan and always changing positions to suit the "mood"(negative).

    Based on the study I guess I'm a schizo. I like order when I'm dealing with circumstances(I am most content to know what bill comes up when and how much said bill is) but I also am able to adapt when situations arise that might not occur on a routine basis(probably because I try to plan unforseen circumstances into stuff like the budget).

    I wasn't overly impressed with the study.

    by cwaltz on Mon Sep 10, 2007 at 10:59:44 AM PDT

•  The LA Times

  covered the same story today.  A link to their article is here.  Free registration is required.

  by Jersey Joe on Mon Sep 10, 2007 at 11:01:56 AM PDT

•  And I thought red brains was an oxymoron n/t

  by jfdunphy on Mon Sep 10, 2007 at 11:44:03 AM PDT

•  hold on

  I'm always skeptical when studies say that peoples choices aren't really choices.  Let's not forget to take responsibility for our actions.  Anything else will ultimately play into the hands of a gov't that wants to take away our choices ( after all we can't help it, right? ).
  Other than that, very interesting.  The liberal mind is more open minded and able to learn from mistakes. Unfortunately, because of our more objective nature, it makes winning ( at all cost, especially ) more difficult.  Just look at this Iraq mess in our legislature.  The RW is winning despite overwhelming reasons to get OUT.

  by Nyroh on Mon Sep 10, 2007 at 11:52:44 AM PDT