Homo politicus: brain function of liberals, conservatives differs

by Marlowe Hood Sun Sep 9, 1:33 PM ET

PARIS (AFP) - The brain neurons of liberals and conservatives fire differently when confronted with tough choices, suggesting that some political divides may be hard-wired, according a study released Sunday.
ADVERTISEMENT

Aristotle may have been more on the mark than he realised when he said that man is by nature a political animal.

Dozens of previous studies have established a strong link between political persuasion and certain personality traits.

Conservatives tend to crave order and structure in their lives, and are more consistent in the way they make decisions. Liberals, by contrast, show a higher tolerance for ambiguity and complexity, and adapt more easily to unexpected circumstances.

The affinity between political views and "cognitive style" has also been shown to be heritable, handed down from parents to children, said the study, published in the British journal Nature Neuroscience.

Intrigued by these correlations, New York University political scientist David Amodio and colleagues decided to find out if the brains of liberals and conservatives reacted differently to the same stimuli.

A group of 43 right-handed subjects were asked to perform a series of computer tests designed to evaluate their unrehearsed response to cues urging them to break a well-established routine.

"People often drive home from work on the same route, day after day, such that it becomes habitual and doesn't involve much thinking," Amodio explained by way of comparison in an e-mail.

"But occasionally there is road work, or perhaps an animal crosses the road, and you need to break out of your habitual response in order to deal with this new information."

Using electroencephalographs, which measure neuronal impulses, the researchers examined activity in a part of the brain -- the anterior cingulate cortex -- that is strongly linked with the self-regulatory process of conflict monitoring.

The match-up was unmistakable: respondents who had described themselves as liberals showed "significantly greater conflict-related neural activity" when the hypothetical situation called for an unscheduled break in routine.

Conservatives, however, were less flexible, refusing to deviate from old habits "despite signals that this ... should be changed."

Whether that is good or bad, of course, depends on one's perspective: one could interpret the results to mean that liberals are nimble-minded and conservatives rigid and stubborn.

Or one could, with equal justice, conclude that wishy-washy liberals don't stick to their guns, while conservatives and steadfast and loyal.

As to the more intriguing question of which comes first, the patterns in neuron activity or the political orientation, Amodio is reluctant to hazard a guess.

"The neural mechanisms for conflict monitoring are formed early in childhood," and are probably rooted in part in our genetic heritage, he said.

"But even if genes may provide a blueprint for more liberal or conservative orientations, they are shaped substantially by one's environment over the course of development," he added.

Obscuring causal links even more is the fact that the brain is malleable and neural functions can change as a result of new experiences.

Taking fresh information into account? Considering the circumstances? Thinking before making a decision?

Aren't there laws against that sort of thing now?

As to the more intriguing question of which comes first, the patterns in neuron activity or the political orientation, Amodio is reluctant to hazard a guess.

That's because he'll get $5 million from the Dept. of Duh to do another "study" to answer that one.

How did they determine who was a liberal and who was conservative? Self-reporting?

What about Democrats using Florida voting machines? Aren't they essentially anencephalic? No higher brain function to test.

I smell a bias.

Thats because you are afraid of change

Politians have brain functions?!?

unlikely, but the experiment was able to, at the least, chart the irreparable damage that politicians have done to our executive brain functions.

progressive mindset, open to change
vs.
stay-the-course attitude, uncomfortable with change

Does this make the RIAA "conservative"?

ARTs are -simply- ARTs, only the Politicians are the RATs... !!!½

Autodidact, I resemble that remark! And I don't use the machines, I vote by absentee ballot because I have other things to do than stand in a line two hours long....

"Does this make the RIAA "conservative"?

Well, they certainly aren't LIBERALlly endowed (with fairness or decency). They resist changes, holding on to a failed business model. Etc.
Conservatives will cling to a failed way of functioning.
Just look at our current President, IMHO.

I meant LIBERALLY (not "LIBERALlly").

"Just look at our current President,"

They tried to test him, but they couldn't get a signal.

neither Repubs nor Dems seem to wish to delete the old ways and reinstall new ways.
Laws declared unconstitutional are still on the books in MI so even tho' it's general knowledge that oral sex is now legal a cop can still arrest you. The last major re-write of laws in MI was when all sexual offences became CSC (Criminal Sexual Conduct) back in the '80s
(off subject yet?!? lol)
My idea for legalising weed would be to strip away all the old laws conserning entire classes of products and forming a new set of laws and the Dept of Legalized Recreational Drugs (alcohol, tobbaco, weed, caffine?, XTC?!?) also giving way to either approve or disapprove new drugs for this new class...
usually politicians just write new laws on top of old laws making a bigger and bigger mess that's harder to read and understand (like my ramblings are easy ?!?)
bleh, just one of my biggest gripes about the government... the other big gripe is; telemarketing should be illegal and not using yer turn signal should be a bigger fine then speeding on the freeway

Serious conservatives want massive change. We want to get back to constitutional principles, which means getting the federal government out of 80% of the things it has its nose into. Also, when the constitution was signed, there was no such thing as a corporation that had the rights of a person. Income taxes were forbidden. We had a President who advised against foreign entanglements.

Moving in that direction would be an amazing shift. So as I see it, true conservatism means wanting massive change from what we have now. It is liberals who fear that change.

This is why I see the study as meaningless. It isn't a question of openness or discomfort with change. It is an issue of what kind of change is needed.

I am not a liberal or conservative. Anyone who thinks that they "are" one or the other is kidding themselves. All humans are combinations of change and stasis to varying degrees. This can be demonstrated even at the cellular level.

If anything I am a true libertarian, and I hate what so called "conservatives" have done to my movement. I don't know what "serious conservative" means. You are against corporations, income tax and foreign entanglements?


NOTE:- The Dutch East India Company and Lloyds of London were in existence for quite awhile before 1776.

Labes are pretty lame things -- another reason it is hard to study what this study claims to attempt.

Yes, I'm against income tax, corporations, and foreign entanglements (generally speaking). I am against abortion, gay marriage, government health care, federal meddling in public schools, government waste, wage and price controls, manipulation of our monetary system, and many other symptoms of government overreach.

I believe in God, church, and family. As a believer in biblical law, I actually think slavery is OK -- for *criminals*, but not for black Africans or any other race. We all should have the same unalienable rights. I depart from John Lennon on the subject of Jesus, but we both don't believe in Kennedy, Hitler, Buddha, or Zimmerman.

I'd say that's a fair fit for my self description as a serious conservative.

I think they call that social conservatism.

I am neither a conservative nor a liberal, I am an asshole.
Telemarketing being legal and weed being illegal proves to me that our govenment has lost contact with the American population.
When congress gave corperations the same rights as persons (in order to conduct business) they shouldve given indivisual persons the same rights as megacorperations.
I believe in a Higher Power that created us, even as a Wiccan I do not mind the motto "In God We Trust" (just remember that George Washington, Ben Franklin, John Adams, William Whipple, Thomas Jefferson and other Founding Fathers and Framers were NOT christians, even tho' they were very religous)
I believe our Founding Fathers would be disgusted at the overreach our current govenment has and they would indeed be filesharing RIAA media. The population should be in control NOT forgein megacorperations.
I believe the mentally handicapped and criminals should NOT own a firearm (depending on the illnesses and depending on the crimes) otherwise their is no reason to limit firearm ownership to any American.
I dont believe in the death penalty, strangly enough consitering my belief in harsh punishments for certain crimes....
I believe everyone's opinion is worth hearing, even those of racists, criminals, blondes, socialists, pirates, bleeding hearts and artists,... just not telemarketers lol

I believe in boycott-riaa.com and in Dmusic.com