Little is known about the association between measured intelligence and how people participate in democratic processes. In the 1970 British Cohort Study, we examined the association between childhood intelligence and, at age 34: whether and how people voted in the 2001 UK general election; how they intended to vote; and whether they had taken part in other political activities. People with higher childhood intelligence were more likely to vote in the 2001 election (38% increased prevalence per SD increase in intelligence), and were more likely to vote for the Green Party and the Liberal Democrats (49% and 47% increased prevalence per SD increase in intelligence, respectively). The intelligence-Green party voting association was largely accounted for by occupational social class, the intelligence-Liberal Democrat voting association was not. Similar associations between intelligence and preference for the Green Party or Liberal Democrats were found as regards voting intentions, but neither of these associations was accounted for by occupational social class. People with higher childhood intelligence were more likely to take part in rallies and demonstrations, and to sign petitions, and expressed a greater interest in politics (40%, 65%, 33%, and 58% increased prevalence per SD increase in intelligence, respectively).
For the layman: smart kids vote for liberal parties more than conservative parties later in life even when you account for social class and occupation.
A very interesting line of research indeed. There is no a priori reason to assume that liberals and conservatives would share a similar intelligence level. I like this research question.
Programs: Piggly Wiggly "Shop the Pig!" Preferred Shopper
Posts: 8,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by magiciansampras
Thoughts?
My first thought is that this might pose a quandry for liberals. Sure, "we're generally smarter than those idiots" has great appeal. But this study places a lot of emphasis on measured intelligence, or IQ -- and measured at very early ages. Aren't liberals usually uncomfortable with IQ, especially when it comes to early childhood?
But this study places a lot of emphasis on measured intelligence, or IQ -- and measured at very early ages. Aren't liberals usually uncomfortable with IQ, especially when it comes to early childhood?
"IQ" is actually a poor term for measured intelligence, despite its glib usage even in academic literature. "General mental ability" or simply "g" is a better term (through rarely used outside of academic research), and is measured by any one of a number of remarkably precise and sensitive tests, such as the Wechsler tests.
Despite popular belief, IQ is actually quite stable after about age 4 or 5. One advantage of IQ measurements taken from childhood is that the test scores tend to be less noisy, and therefore are unlikely introduce unobserved variable error into a predictive model
For the layman: smart kids vote for liberal parties more than conservative parties later in life even when you account for social class and occupation.
Indeed, but the abstract also includes these snippets:
Quote:
People with higher childhood intelligence were more likely to vote ...
People with higher childhood intelligence were more likely to take part in rallies and demonstrations, and to sign petitions, and expressed a greater interest in politics ...
Taken together, it seems reasonable to conclude that more intelligent people tend to think more about solutions to society's ills, and thus favor more government involvement to solve those ills.
Traditionally, liberal parties have tended toward more government solutions, and conservative ones less. (I'm not familiar with the UK's parties which directly relate to this study, so this assumption could be off.)
For example, in the US, intelligent people are trying to fix our broken health care system. Less intelligent people are objecting to bits and pieces of the legislation that they don't understand, and don't trust that government is smarter than they are when government forces them to buy insurance they're not smart enough to know they need, etc.
__________________
“The scientific theory I like best is that the rings of Saturn are composed entirely of lost airline luggage.” - Mark Russell
To put it another way, not all conservatives are stupid, but most stupid people are conservative.
Given that (self-identified) conservatives outnumber other ideologies, then even if there were an equal distribution of <fill in the blank> totally uncorrelated with conservatism, it would be a true statement that most <fill in the blank> people are conservative.
Quote:
Originally Posted by telloh
it is a fact that almost all people of lower intelligence are conservative politically.
Lower than what?
2000 exit poll info:
High school dropouts
Gore 59 % - Bush 39 %
High School graduate
Gore 48 % - Bush 49 %
Some College
Gore 45 % - Bush 51 %
College grad
Gore 45 % - Bush 51 %
Post grad
Gore 52 % - Bush 44 %
One possible conclusion: the really smart people are liberal. People of average and above average intelligence are conservative. Stupid people are liberal.
Another possible conclusion: Members of academia who rely on government grants favor liberals. School dropouts who rely on government welfare favor liberals. Adults who are smart enough to progress beyond high school and work hard for higher pay favor (alleged) conservatives.
__________________
“The scientific theory I like best is that the rings of Saturn are composed entirely of lost airline luggage.” - Mark Russell
Another possible conclusion: Members of academia who rely on government grants favor liberals. School dropouts who rely on government welfare favor liberals. Adults who are smart enough to progress beyond high school and work hard for higher pay favor (alleged) conservatives.
I see this as possible from my own personal experience. I work at a large corporate research center and am surrounded with PhD level scientists and engineers. All of them are conservative. This is much different from my experiences from academia. Corporate PhD's are less dependent on government grants than academic PhD's.
Given that (self-identified) conservatives outnumber other ideologies, then even if there were an equal distribution of <fill in the blank> totally uncorrelated with conservatism, it would be a true statement that most <fill in the blank> people are conservative.
Lower than what?
2000 exit poll info:
High school dropouts
Gore 59 % - Bush 39 %
High School graduate
Gore 48 % - Bush 49 %
Some College
Gore 45 % - Bush 51 %
College grad
Gore 45 % - Bush 51 %
Post grad
Gore 52 % - Bush 44 %
One possible conclusion: the really smart people are liberal. People of average and above average intelligence are conservative. Stupid people are liberal.
Another possible conclusion: Members of academia who rely on government grants favor liberals. School dropouts who rely on government welfare favor liberals. Adults who are smart enough to progress beyond high school and work hard for higher pay favor (alleged) conservatives.
You're assuming a direct correlation between intelligence and level of education. The more likely correlation is between family income and level of education.
You're assuming a direct correlation between intelligence and level of education. The more likely correlation is between family income and level of education.
Family income level is a more likely predictor of high school dropouts than, say, failing classes or skipping them because they're too hard?
I'd agree with your family income statement if college were the discriminator, but the stats are reasonably consistent from high school graduates through college degrees.
And FWIW, I'm not "assuming" anything with intelligence or even trying to agree with the conclusions of others this thread. I'm just throwing some data out there to feed the debate. I think my second explanation, basing political ideology on the degree of reliance an individual has on the government, is far more likely than anything related to intelligence.
__________________
“The scientific theory I like best is that the rings of Saturn are composed entirely of lost airline luggage.” - Mark Russell
I'm just throwing some data out there to feed the debate.
???? But you "threw the data" in direct response to something the data has nothing to do with. That isn't "feeding" debate, it is muddying it. Anybody with money can get a PHD. Anybody with money can get an MS. Anbody with money can get a BS/BA.
The point is that, in general, stupid people are conservative politically.
It has nothing to do with what degrees money can buy.
???? But you "threw the data" in direct response to something the data has nothing to do with. That isn't "feeding" debate, it is muddying it. Anybody with money can get a PHD. Anybody with money can get an MS. Anbody with money can get a BS/BA.
None of that data had anything to do with an MS, and I'll be happy to throw out the BS/BA/some college statistic and just compare HS dropouts with HS graduates.
You don't need money to get a high school diploma.
Dropping out of high school is a generally stupid thing to do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by telloh
The point is that, in general, stupid people are conservative politically.
You keep repeating that but you provide zero evidence to support that absurd claim.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1994-2002 General Social Surveys (GSS)
Republicans have over 6/10ths of a year more education on average than Democrats. Republicans also have a higher final mean educational degree. Further, Republicans scored better than Democrats on two word tests in the GSS--a short vocabulary test and a modified analogies test.
If one breaks down the data by party affiliation and political orientation, the most highly educated group is conservative Republicans, who also score highest on the vocabulary and analogical reasoning tests. Liberal Democrats score only insignificantly lower than conservative Republicans. The least educated subgroups are moderate and conservative Democrats, who also score at the bottom (or very near the bottom) on vocabulary and analogy tests.
Huh. Maybe you're right. Stupid people are conservative.... Democrats.
__________________
“The scientific theory I like best is that the rings of Saturn are composed entirely of lost airline luggage.” - Mark Russell
Family income level is a more likely predictor of high school dropouts than, say, failing classes or skipping them because they're too hard?
I'd agree with your family income statement if college were the discriminator, but the stats are reasonably consistent from high school graduates through college degrees.
And FWIW, I'm not "assuming" anything with intelligence or even trying to agree with the conclusions of others this thread. I'm just throwing some data out there to feed the debate. I think my second explanation, basing political ideology on the degree of reliance an individual has on the government, is far more likely than anything related to intelligence.
You seem to have a logical disconnect in your thinking. My post points out that there is more likely to be a higher correlation between income and advanced education than intelligence. You respond by questioning a completely different comparison -- one that I did not make. Easy to argue a point when you make up positions for your opponent.
For the record, I think you will find that dropping out of high school is also highly correlated with income.
Your second 'explanation' is simply self-aggrandizing nonsense.
are liberals smarter than conservatives?
