I've mentioned before that I have an overactive amygdala. Through a series of genetically determined events that I've explained before here, I get an intense second-hand fear response that renders me unable to watch scary movies. Just can't take it when the actress hears a noise and heads right down to the cellar to investigate when I know full well she should run even as I also know it's only a movie.
Now anxiety is a good thing when it sets off an appropriate 'fight or flight' response that allows us to recognize danger and either run or creep down those stairs provided we're fully certified in the martial arts (of course, karate is no use at all against the supernatural...). And it's a bad thing when it renders us unable to leave the house or apply for a job (met a patient like that just yesterday). But who'd have thought that an overactive--or indifferent--amygdala might affect our political beliefs? Well, color me conservative as I read the following from Science Magazine.(1)
Political scientists teamed up with psychologists in Texas and Nebraska to find out if our political beliefs might have a biological basis. In their own words:
In a group of 46 adult participants with strong political beliefs, individuals with measurably lower physical sensitivities to sudden noises and threatening visual images were more likely to support foreign aid, liberal immigration policies, pacifism, and gun control, whereas individuals displaying measurably higher physiological reactions to those same stimuli were more likely to favor defense spending, capital punishment, patriotism, and the Iraq War.
During session one, the scientists quizzed the group--preselected for the strength of their political convictions no matter what the content of their attitudes-- on their political beliefs, demographics, and personality traits. When the subjects next came down to the lab, they were hooked up to physiological equipment that measured change in skin conductance as well as the strength of their blink or startle response. They were then shown three threatening images (a very large spider on the face of a frightened person, a dazed individual with a bloody face, and an open wound with maggots in it) or three sweet little pictures (a bunny, a bowl of fruit, and a happy child) interspersed amongst non-charged visuals.
Arousal causes increased moisture on the skin which increases conductance and fear causes a hard flinch or blink response of the muscles around the eye. Well I don't think I'd have a problem with a maggot show, but I know my heart rate would rise and I'd shut my eyes in moment to a large spider crawling on someone's face. The investigators found that an exaggerated response to the threatening pictures did correlate with a more conservative or socially protective attitude.
While the researchers were reluctant to conclude just what cause and effect processes were at work, they conjectured that "political attitudes and varying physiological responses to threat may both derive from neural activity patterns, perhaps those surrounding the amygdala. Amygdala activity is crucial in shaping responses to socially threatening images and may be connected to political predispositions."
Please note that in no way do I imply that all social conservatives have an exaggerated fear response. Nor do I think that close vigilance on the part of our society with respect to external danger is a bad thing.
_____
Oxley, DR, et al. Political Attitudes Vary with Physiological Traits. Science19 September 2008: Vol. 321. no. 5896, pp. 1667 - 1670.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Knew there had to be some part of Gov. Palin's brain that's somewhat functional. Thanks.
This makes total sense to me, being "a bag over the head" scary movie watcher.
Exposed once again:)
So does that mean if we put all the conservatives on Xanax they might become liberals? Worth a try...
"In a group of 46 adult participants with strong political beliefs, individuals with measurably lower physical sensitivities to sudden noises and threatening visual images were more likely to support foreign aid, liberal immigration policies, pacifism, and gun control, whereas individuals displaying measurably higher physiological reactions to those same stimuli were more likely to favor defense spending, capital punishment, patriotism, and the Iraq War."
Wow! Does anyone need a glaring counter-example to THAT thesis? SPEAKING! Male, (strongly) hetero, hyper sensitivity to physical stimuli ... particularly [acutely!] sound ... all my life, now with terrible PTSD for 17 years after two events (undeniably PTSD-level stressors, both) in 1993.
The rest of my family (parents, sibling) can't stand a moment of silence, and can't carry on a conversation unless they're all shouting over a TV (sometimes 2) running ... that no one is watching.
They think I'm a closet socialist (I don't think of myself as a "liberal". I judge issue by issue, but usually side with a "liberal" trend).
They love the likes of Palin, despite the numerous shortcomings of such that keep popping up.
I was never so surprised as to hear the thesis presented.
There is one possible explanation for me: a brush with "Asperger's" syndrome. My son has it, and at least one of my brother's three kids have it. I seem to have conquered a mild "case" of it (but with unusual physical and mental sensitivities, and channeling of thought, remaining).
Make that two possible explanations. I think higher education tends to lend a distinct "liberal" bent to one's otherwise disposition.
I understand the "common sense" reasoning behind the thesis, but it goes very much against what I have observed through my 66 years of life (I'm a keen observer of human nature). I honestly think careful studies would find little cause-effect relationship. I'm suspicious of this purported one. (Perhaps the sample class was homogeneous in some respect[s] ... as well as very small?).
I just found your blog. Wish I lived in Denver: I surely need a doctor [but sensitivity to cold, too ... Reynaud's :].
It is so good to see someone really "into" life as a science, as well as an "avocation". It seems so rare. "I too."
Post a Comment