No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Afraid of whom?
Threat sensitivity’s influence changes with perceived source of threat
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 03 June 2022
Abstract
Taking insights from the fields of psychology and biology, a growing body of scholarship considers the psychophysiological foundations of political attitudes. Subconscious emotional reactions to threat, for example, have been shown to predict socially conservative attitudes toward out-groups. However, many of these studies fail to consider different sources of perceived threat. Using a combination of survey and physiological data, I distinguish between fear of others and fear of authority, finding that threat sensitivity predicts divergent political attitudes depending on the strength of each. Those who are more sensitive to threat from others tend to hold socially conservative attitudes, while those who fear authority generally take more libertarian positions. As sensitivity to threat is at least partially inherited, these findings highlight the genetic role of political predispositions.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Open Practices
Open materials
Open data
- Copyright
- © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Politics and the Life Sciences
Footnotes
This article earned Open Materials and Open Data badges for open scientific practices. For details, see the Open Scientific Practices Statement.
References
Abramson, P. R., Aldrich, J. H., Rickershauser, J., & Rohde, D.W. (2007). Fear in the voting booth: The 2004 presidential election. Political Behavior, 29(2), 197–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alford, J. R., & Hibbing, J. R. (2004). The origin of politics: An evolutionary theory of political behavior. Perspectives on Politics, 2(4), 707–723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arceneaux, K., Dunaway, J., & Soroka, S. (2018). Elites are people, too: The effects of threat sensitivity on policymakers’ spending priorities. PLOS ONE, 13(4), e0193781.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arceneaux, K., Johnson, M., & Maes, H. H. (2012). The genetic basis of political sophistication. Twin Research and Human Genetics, 15(1), 34–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bakker, B. N., Schumacher, G., Gothreau, C., & Arceneaux, K. (2020). Conservatives and liberals have similar physiological responses to threats. Nature Human Behavior, 4(2), 613–621.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barkow, J. H., Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J., eds. (1992). The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Berinsky, A. J., Huber, G. A., & Lenz, G. S. (2012). Evaluating online labor markets for experimental research: Amazon.com’s Mechanical Turk. Political Analysis, 20(3), 351–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blais, A., & St. Vincent, S. L. (2011). Personality traits, political attitudes and the propensity to vote. European Journal of Political Research, 50(3), 395–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braithwaite, J., Watson, D., Jones, R., & Rowe, M. 2013. A guide for analyzing electrodermal activity (EDA) & skin conductance responses (SCRs) for psychological experiments [Technical Report]. Selection Attention & Awareness Laboratory Behavioural Brain Sciences Centre, University of Birmingham. https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/Documents/college-les/psych/saal/guide-electrodermal-activity.pdfGoogle Scholar
Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011). Amazon’s Mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6(1), 3–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cesario, J., Plaks, J. E., Hagiwara, N., Navarrete, C. D., & Higgins, E. T. (2010). The ecology of automaticity: How situational contingencies shape action semantics and social behavior. Psychological Science, 21(9), 1311–1317.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chen, M. H. (2016). Trust in immigration enforcement: State noncooperation and sanctuary cities after Secure Communities. Chicago-Kent Law Review, 91(1), 13–58.Google Scholar
Darwin, C. (1872). The expression of the emotions in man and animals. London: John Murray.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawes, C. T., Cesarini, D., Fowler, J. H., Johannesson, M., Magnusson, P. K. E., & Oskarsson, S. (2014). The relationship between genes, psychological traits, and political participation. American Journal of Political Science, 58(4), 888–903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denny, K., & Doyle, O. (2008). Political interest, cognitive ability and personality: Determinants of voter turnout in Britain. British Journal of Political Science, 38(2), 291–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Derogatis, L. R. (1993). Brief symptom inventory: Administration, scoring and procedures manual. National Computer Systems.Google Scholar
Derogatis, L. R. (1994). Symptom Checklist-90-R: Administration, scoring & procedure manual for the revised version of the SCL-90. National Computer Systems.Google Scholar
Dinev, T., Hart, P., & Mullen, M. R. (2008). Internet privacy concerns and beliefs about government surveillance—An empirical investigation. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 17(3), 214–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dodd, M. D., Balzer, A., Jacobs, C. M., Gruszczynski, M. W., Smith, K. B., & Hibbing, J. R. (2012). The political left rolls with the good and the political right confronts the bad: Connecting physiology and cognition to preferences. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 367(1589), 640–649.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Druckman, J. N., & Leeper, T. J. (2012). Learning more from political communication experiments: Pretreatment and its effects. American Journal of Political Science, 56(4), 875–896.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eaves, L. J., & Eysenck, H. J. (1974). Genetics and the development of social attitudes. Nature, 249(454), 288–289.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eaves, L. J., Eysenck, H. J, & Martin, N. G. (1989). Genes, culture, and personality: An empirical approach. Academic Press.Google Scholar
Fowler, J. H., Baker, L. A., & Dawes, C. T. (2008). Genetic variation in political participation. American Political Science Review, 102(2), 233–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gadarian, S. K, & Albertson, B. (2014). Anxiety, immigration, and the search for information. Political Psychology, 35(2), 133–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallego, A., & Oberski, D. (2012). Personality and political participation: the mediation hypothesis. Political Behavior, 34(3), 425–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelman, A., and Carlin, J. (2014). Beyond power calculations: Assessing Type S (sign) and Type M (magnitude) errors. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9(6), 641–651.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gerber, A. S., Huber, G. A., Doherty, D., Dowling, C. M., Raso, C., & Ha, S. E. (2011). Personality traits and participation in the political processes. Journal of Politics, 73(3), 692–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, M. J., & Phillips, M. L. (2004). Social threat perception and the evolution of paranoia. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 28(3), 333–342.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hatemi, P. K., Gillespie, N. A., Eaves, L. J., Maher, B. S., Webb, B. T., Heath, A. C., Medland, S. E., Smyth, D. C., Beeby, H. N., Gordon, S. D., Montgomery, G. W., Zhu, G., Byrne, E. M., & Martin, N. G. (2011). A genome-wide analysis of liberal and conservative political attitudes. Journal of Politics, 73(1), 271–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hatemi, P. K., & McDermott, R. (2012). The genetics of politics: Discovery, challenges, and progress. Trends in Genetics, 28(10), 525–533.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hatemi, P. K., & McDermott, R. (2020). Dispositional fear and political attitudes. Human Nature, 31(4), 387–405.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hatemi, P. K., McDermott, R., Eaves, L. J., Kendler, K. S., & Neale, M. C. (2013). Fear as a disposition and an emotional state: A genetic and environmental approach to out-group political preferences. American Journal of Political Science, 57(2), 279–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hatemi, P. K., Medland, S. E., Klemmensen, R., Oskarsson, S., Littvay, L., Dawes, C. T., Verhulst, B., McDermott, R., Nørgaard, A. S., Klofstad, C. A., Christense, K., Johannesson, M., Magnusson, P. K. E., Eaves, L. J., & Martin, N. G. (2014). Genetic influences on political ideologies: Twin analyses of 19 measures of political ideologies from five democracies and genome-wide findings from three populations. Behavior Genetics, 44(3), 282–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hatemi, P. K., Medland, S. E., Morley, K. I., Heath, A. C., & Martin, N. G. (2007). The genetics of voting: An Australian twin study. Behavior Genetics, 37, 435–448.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hetherington, M. J., & Weiler, J. D. (2009). Authoritarianism & polarization in American politics. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hibbing, J. A., Smith, K. B., & Alford, J. A. (2014). Predisposed: Liberals, conservatives, and the biology of political differences. Routledge.Google Scholar
Kinder, D. R., & Sanders, L. M. (1996). Divided by color: Racial politics and democratic ideals. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kinder, D. R., & Sears, D. O. (1981). Prejudice and politics: Symbolic racism versus racial threats to the good life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40(3), 414–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lang, P. J., Bradley, M. M., & Cuthbert, B. N. (2008). International affective picture system (IAPS): Affective ratings of pictures and instruction manual (Technical Report No. A-8). University of Florida.Google Scholar
Linden, A. (2019). Retrodesign: Stata module to compute type-S (sign) and type-M (magnitude) errors (Statistical Software Components S458631). Boston College, Department of Economics.Google Scholar
Long, J. S., & Freese, J. (2014). Regression models for categorical dependent variables using Stata (3rd ed.). Stata Press.Google Scholar
Loewen, P. J., & Dawes, C. T. (2012). The heritability of duty and voter turnout. Political Psychology, 33(3), 363–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madison, J. (1788). Federalist No. 51: The structure of the government must furnish the proper checks and balances between the different departments. New York Packet.Google Scholar
Marks, I. M., & Mathews, A. M. (1979). Brief standard self-rating for phobic patients. Behavior Research and Therapy, 17(3), 263–267.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Martin, N. G., Eaves, L. J., Heath, A. C., Jardine, R., Feingold, L. M, & Eysenck, H. J. (1986). Transmission of social attitudes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 83(12), 4364–4368.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. Jr. (2008). The five-factor theory of personality. In John, O. P., Robins, R. W., & Pervin, L. A. (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp 159–181). Guildford Press.Google Scholar
Mendelberg, T. (2001). The race card: Campaign strategy, implicit messages, and the norm of equality. Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mondak, J. J. (2010). Personality and the foundations of political behavior. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mustafaj, M., Madrigal, G., Roden, J., & Ploger, G. W. (2021). Physiological threat sensitivity predicts anti-immigrant attitudes. Politics and the Life Sciences, 41(1), 15–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olsson, A., Ebert, J. P., Banaji, M. R., & Phelps, E. A. (2005). The role of social groups in the persistence of learned fear. Science, 309(5735), 785–787.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oxley, D. R., Smith, K. B., Alford, J. R., Hibbing, M. V., Miller, J. L., Scalora, M., Hatemi, P. K., & Hibbing, J. R. (2008). Political attitudes vary with physiological traits. Science, 321(5896), 1667–1670.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paolacci, G., Chandler, J., & Ipeirotis, P. G. (2010). Running experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk. Judgment and Decision Making, 5(5), 411–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pedersen, W. S., Muftuler, L. T., & Larson, C. L. (2017). Conservatism and the neural circuitry of threat: Economic conservatism predicts greater amygdala-BNST connectivity during periods of threat vs safety. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 13(1), 43–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perrin, A. J. (2005). National threat and political culture: Authoritarianism, antiauthoritarianism, and the September 11 attacks. Political Psychology, 26(2), 167–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petersen, M. B. (2012). Social welfare as small-scale help: Evolutionary psychology and the deservingness heuristic. American Journal of Political Science, 56(1), 1–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rocha, R. R., Knoll, B. R., & Wrinkle, R. D. (2015). Immigration enforcement and the redistribution of political trust. Journal of Politics, 77(4), 901–913.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Santos, A., Meyer-Lindenberg, A., & Deruelle, C. (2010). Absence of racial, but not gender, stereotyping in Williams syndrome children. Current Biology, 20(7), 307–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schreiber, D., Fonzo, G., Simmons, A. N., Dawes, C. T., Flagan, T., Fowler, J. H., & Paulus, M. P. (2013). Red brain, blue brain: Evaluative processes differ in Democrats and Republicans. PLOS ONE, 8(2), e52970.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Settle, J. E., Hibbing, M. V., Anspach, N. M., Carlson, T. N., Coe, C. M., Hernandez, E., Peterson, J., Stuart, J., & Arceneaux, K. (2020). Political psychophysiology: a primer for interested researchers and consumers. Politics and the Life Sciences, 39(1), 101–117.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Skitka, L. J., Bauman, C. W., & Mullen, E. (2004). Political tolerance and coming to psychological closure following the Septemeber 11, 2001, terrorist attacks: An integrative approach. Personality and Social Psychology Bullentin, 30(6), 743–756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soss, J., Langbein, L., & Metelko, A. R. (2003). Why do white Americans support the death penalty? Journal of Politics, 65(2), 397–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stephan, W. G., & Stephan, C. W. (2000). An integrated threat theory of prejudice. In Oskamp, Stuart (Ed.), Reducing prejudice and discrimination (pp. 225–246). Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Tybur, J. M., & Lieberman, D. (2016). Human pathogen avoidance adaptations. Current Opinion in Psychology, 7, 6–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Zuuren, F. J. (1988). The Fear Questionnaire: Some data on validity, reliability and layout. British Journal of Psychiatry, 153(5), 659–662.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vecchione, M., & Caprara, G. V. (2009). Personality determinants of political participation: The contribution of traits and self-efficacy beliefs. Personality and Individual Differences, 46(4), 487–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verhulst, B., Eaves, L. J., & Hatemi, P. K. (2012). Correlation, not causation: The relationship between personality traits and political ideologies. American Journal of Political Science, 56(1), 34–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weinschenk, A. C., and Dawes, C. T. (2017). The relationship between genes, personality traits, and political interest. Political Research Quarterly, 70(3), 467–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weinschenk, A. C., and Dawes, C. T. (2018). Genes, personality traits, and the sense of civic duty. American Politics Research, 46(1), 47–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woody, E. Z., & Szechtman, H. (2011). Adaptation to potential threat: The evolution, neurobiology, and psychopathology of the security motivation system. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 35(4), 1019–1033.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Anspach supplementary material
Anspach supplementary material
File
187.7 KB