It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
(visit the link for the full news article)
Using this new analysis of 82 people who performed the gambling task, the academics showed that Republicans and Democrats do not differ in the risks they take. However, there were striking differences in the participants' brain activity during the risk-taking task.
Democrats showed significantly greater activity in the left insula, a region associated with social and self-awareness. Meanwhile Republicans showed significantly greater activity in the right amygdala, a region involved in the body's fight-or-flight system. These results suggest that liberals and conservatives engage different c
"A big part of my argument is that, rather than the rational choice model that sees people as individualists calculating their own utility functions, we are all fundamentally social creatures, meaning that I also consider your utility as well as my own and I’d like to increase both if I can because I benefit from the well-being of all of us. This brain that thinks in coalitions also allows us to think in terms of what moral sentiments we’d like to have towards whom, so if I’m trying to figure out if you’re an us or a them I use different neural mechanisms to think about moral calculations. Do I use a sort of what’s described as a deontological Kantian framework that implies I should never ever push you off a bridge if you’re a friend of mine, versus a kind of utilitarian calculation that says I’d sacrifice one person to save twenty five? Depending on whether you’re judged as an us or a them we make different calculations, and use different neural mechanisms in each of these instances. Knowing this helps to unwrap some of the puzzles we’ve seen in human behavior, and gets us a more fundamental understanding of human politics."
You could infer from this that the cognitive styles of conversatives diifer from liberals in that self-centered fear motivates the conservative (red) folk
Originally posted by FyreByrd
Red Brain, Blue Brain: Republicans and Democrats Process Risk Differently, Research Finds
www.sciencedaily.com
(visit the link for the full news article)
Using this new analysis of 82 people who performed the gambling task, the academics showed that Republicans and Democrats do not differ in the risks they take. However, there were striking differences in the participants' brain activity during the risk-taking task.
Democrats showed significantly greater activity in the left insula, a region associated with social and self-awareness. Meanwhile Republicans showed significantly greater activity in the right amygdala, a region involved in the body's fight-or-flight system. These results suggest that liberals and conservatives engage different c
Related News Links:
smokeandstir.org
2012election.procon.org
healthland.time.com
Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Conservative or Liberal, gray matter may decide how you vote in November,
What am I? Liberal or Conservative? Republican or Democrat?
Are Liberals REALLY More Intelligent Than Conservatives?
Is The Arc Of American History Toward A Conservative Or Liberal Direction?
Originally posted by xedocodex
reply to post by FyreByrd
You could infer from this that the cognitive styles of conversatives diifer from liberals in that self-centered fear motivates the conservative (red) folk
Which would explain why they love guns so much...they live life in a state of fear.
So, if I own guns that means I'm a republican who is afraid of everything? Interesting, but idiotic assesment. I own guns. I am a libertarian (if I have to choose one).
And I'm not afraid of anything.
Originally posted by BobbyTarass
82 people, Seriously ? When even under 1000 it'd be considered as a non-representative sample, how did they managed to even get their paper printed ?
This is plain bull#.
Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
Originally posted by BobbyTarass
82 people, Seriously ? When even under 1000 it'd be considered as a non-representative sample, how did they managed to even get their paper printed ?
This is plain bull#.
Even at stage 1 Stats they teach you about sample sizes and confidence intervals.
82 is plenty to make an inference about if the corelation is strong enough.
Which would explain why they love guns so much...they live life in a state of fear.
The point is that you are "conservative"...correct...and I personally believe that what drives a lot of gun owners to buy guns is fear and paranoia.
Originally posted by BobbyTarass
Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
Originally posted by BobbyTarass
82 people, Seriously ? When even under 1000 it'd be considered as a non-representative sample, how did they managed to even get their paper printed ?
This is plain bull#.
Even at stage 1 Stats they teach you about sample sizes and confidence intervals.
82 is plenty to make an inference about if the corelation is strong enough.
Oh how I like that patronizing tone.
No it's not enough when we're lacking data about the whole process, all we have here is a sample of less than 100 persons and a claim of a 82% confidence interval.
Hell, it'd have to be a least 95% with that kind of sample, this is just not enough.
Originally posted by BobbyTarass
82 people, Seriously ? When even under 1000 it'd be considered as a non-representative sample, how did they managed to even get their paper printed ?
This is plain bull#.edit on 14-2-2013 by BobbyTarass because: (no reason given)