Neurocognitive Correlates Ofliberalism And Conservatismdavid M Amodi ✓ Solved

Neurocognitive correlates of liberalism and conservatism David M Amodio1, John T Jost1, Sarah L Master2 & Cindy M Yee2 Political scientists and psychologists have noted that, on average, conservatives show more structured and persistent cognitive styles, whereas liberals are more responsive to informational complexity, ambiguity and novelty. We tested the hypothesis that these profiles relate to differences in general neurocognitive functioning using event-related potentials, and found that greater liberalism was associated with stronger conflict-related anterior cingulate activity, suggesting greater neurocognitive sensitivity to cues for altering a habitual response pattern. Political scientists and psychologists have long noted differences in the cognitive and motivational profiles of liberals and conservatives in the USA and elsewhere.

Across dozens of behavioral studies, conservatives have been found to be more structured and persistent in their judgments and approaches to decision-making, as indicated by higher average scores on psychological measures of personal needs for order, structure and closure1. Liberals, by contrast, report higher tolerance of ambiguity and complexity, and greater openness to new experiences on psychological measures. Given that these associations between political orientation and cognitive styles have been shown to be heritable, evident in early childhood, and relatively stable across the lifespan2,3, we hypothesized that political orientation may be associated with individual differences in a basic neurocognitive mechanism involved broadly in self-regulation.

Behavioral research suggests that psychological differences between conservatives and liberals map onto the widely-studied self-regulatory process of conflict monitoring4. Conflict monitoring is a general mechanism for detecting when one’s habitual response tendency is mismatched with responses required by the current situation, and this function has been associated with neurocognitive activity in the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC)5. For example, in the Go/No-Go task used in our study, participants must quickly respond to a frequently presented Go stimulus, such that the ‘Go’ response becomes habitual. However, on a small proportion of trials, a No-Go stimulus appears, signaling that one’s habitual response should be withheld.

Hence, a No-Go stimulus conflicts with the prepotent Go response tendency. Such response conflict is typically associated with enhanced ACC activity, measured using functional magnetic resonance imaging or event-related potentials (ERPs)6,7. We proposed that differences in conservatives’ and liberals’ responsiveness to complex and poten- tially conflicting information relates to the sensitivity of this general mechanism for monitoring response conflict. To test the hypothesis that political liberalism (versus conservatism) would be associated with greater conflict-related ACC activity, we recorded electroencephalographs from 43 right-handed subjects (63% female) as they performed the Go/No-Go task.

Subjects reported their political attitudes confidentially on a –5 (extremely liberal) to +5 (extremely conservative) scale. This single-item measure has been found to account for approximately 85% of the statistical variance in presidential voting intentions in American National Election studies between 1972 and 2004 (ref. 8). Among participants in the present study who reported voting in the 2004 presidential election, a more liberal (versus conservative) ideological orientation strongly predicted voting for John Kerry versus George Bush (r(21) ¼ 0.79, P o 0.001). In our study, conflict-related ACC activity was indexed by two ERP components.

ERPs are scalp-recorded voltage changes reflecting the concerted firing of neurons in response to a psychological event. The response-locked error-related negativity (ERN), which peaks at approxi- mately 50 ms following an incorrect behavioral response9,10, reflects –35a b c E R N a m p lit u d e ( µV ) A m p lit u d e ( µV )–30 –25 –20 –15 –10 –5 –5 5 – 20 Liberal Conservative Time (ms) – r = 0.59 P < 0. –4 00 –3 00 –2 00 – More conservativeMore liberal Political orientation 0 0 Figure 1 The relation between political orientation and a neurocognitive index of conflict monitoring. (a) Political liberalism was associated with larger No-Go error-related negativity (ERN) amplitudes, as indicated by more negative scores, suggesting greater neurocognitive sensitivity to response conflict. (b) ERP waveforms corresponding to No-Go errors, with the waveform for correct Go responses subtracted, are shown for both liberal and conservative participants (response made at 0 ms; ERN peaked at 44 ms postresponse), with the inset showing the voltage map of the scalp distribution of the ERN. (c) Source localization indicates a dorsal anterior cingulate generator for the ERN, computed at peak amplitude (red line in panel b).

Received 11 June; accepted 16 August; published online 9 September 2007; doi:10.1038/nnDepartment of Psychology, New York University, 6 Washington Place, New York, New York 10003, USA. 2Department of Psychology, 1285 Franz Hall, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California 90095, USA. Correspondence should be addressed to D.M.A. ( [email protected] ). 1246 VOLUME 10 [ NUMBER 10 [ OCTOBER 2007 NATURE NEUROSCIENCE B R I E F COM M U N I CAT I O N S © N a tu re P u b lis h in g G ro u p h tt p :/ /w w w .n a tu re .c o m /n a tu re n e u ro sc ie n ce mailto: [email protected] conflict between a habitual tendency (for example, the Go response) and an alternative response (for example, to inhibit behavior in response to a No-Go stimulus)11.

We also examined the No-Go N2 component, which is believed to reflect conflict-monitoring activity associated with the successful inhibition of the prepotent Go response on No-Go trials7. Relationships between political orientation and these neurocognitive indices were examined using correlation analyses (two-tailed). Political orientation was strongly correlated with ERN amplitudes (r(41) ¼ 0.59, P o 0.001; Fig. 1a), as well as with No-Go N2 amplitudes (r(41) ¼ 0.41, P o 0.01). Specifically, liberalism (versus conservatism) was associated with significantly greater conflict-related neural activity when response inhibition was required (that is, on No- Go trials; Fig.

1b). ERPs associated with correct Go responses, scored to correspond to the ERN and No-Go N2, were not related to political orientation (P’s 4 0.37). Supplementary source localization analyses confirmed that the ERN and the N2 originated from activity in the dorsal ACC (accounting for 90% and 91% of signal variance, respec- tively; Fig. 1c, see also Supplementary Fig. 1 and Supplementary Methods online), which is consistent with previous results7,10.

Larger average ERN amplitudes corresponded to better behavioral accuracy on No-Go trials (r(41) ¼ 0.49, P o 0.001), but were unrelated to accuracy on Go trials. No-Go N2 amplitudes were not related to behavior. In addition, stronger liberalism was correlated with greater accuracy on No-Go trials (r(41) ¼ 0.30, P o 0.05). This association suggests that a more conservative orientation is related to greater persistence in a habitual response pattern, despite signals that this response pattern should change (for example, on No-Go trials). This behavioral finding is consistent with the relationship that we observed between political orientation and neurocognitive sensi- tivity to response conflict.

However, a partial correlation analysis revealed that the relation between political attitudes and the ERN remained strong after covarying behavioral accuracy (r(40) ¼ 0.53, P o 0.001), suggesting that liberalism (versus conservatism) is asso- ciated with greater neurocognitive sensitivity to cognitive conflict, beyond what was observed from behavioral performance alone. Taken together, our results are consistent with the view that political orientation, in part, reflects individual differences in the functioning of a general mechanism related to cognitive control and self-regulation1–3. Stronger conservatism (versus liberalism) was associated with less neurocognitive sensitivity to response conflicts.

At the behavioral level, conservatives were also more likely to make errors of commission. Although a liberal orientation was associated with better performance on the response-inhibition task examined here, conservatives would presumably perform better on tasks in which a more fixed response style is optimal. The study of personality variables that accompany differences in political opinions goes back more than fifty years12. Although recent work has demonstrated neural correlates of political information processing and candidate preferences13,14, this is the first study con- necting individual differences in political ideology to a basic neuro- cognitive mechanism for self-regulation. These findings may serve to promote the integration of theorizing in the traditionally disparate fields of political psychology and cognitive neuroscience.

More broadly, this research demonstrates how integration across multiple levels of analysis can begin to elucidate how abstract, seemingly ineffable constructs, such as ideology, are reflected in the human brain. Note: Supplementary information is available on the Nature Neuroscience website. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We thank A. Crampton and B. Lehman for assisting with data collection, and S.

Taylor for laboratory support. AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS D.A. designed and conducted the experiment, analyzed the data, and wrote the manuscript. J.J. contributed to theorizing and co-wrote the manuscript. S.M. assisted in experiment design, data collection, and writing the manuscript. C.Y. provided laboratory support and supervision, and assisted in writing the manuscript.

Published online at Reprints and permissions information is available online at reprintsandpermissions 1. Jost, J.T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A.W. & Sulloway, F.J. Psychol. Bull. 129, 339–).

2. Alford, J.R., Funk, C.L. & Hibbing, J.R. Am. Polit. Sci.

Rev. 99, 153–). 3. Block, J. & Block, J.H. J.

Res. Pers. 40, 734–). 4. Miller, E.K. & Cohen, J.D.

Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 24, 167–). 5.

Botvinick, M.M., Braver, T.S., Barch, D.M., Carter, C.S. & Cohen, J.D. Psychol. Rev. 108, 624–). 6.

Kiehl, K.A., Liddle, P.F. & Hopfinger, J.B. Psychophysiology 37, 216–). 7. Nieuwenhuis, S., Yeung, N., Van Den Wildenberg, W. & Ridderinkhof, K.R. Cogn.

Affect. Behav. Neurosci. 3, 17–). 8.

Jost, J.T. Am. Psychol. 61, 651–). 9.

Gehring, W.J., Goss, B., Coles, M.G.H., Meyer, D.E. & Donchin, E. Psychol. Sci. 4, 385–). 10.

Dehaene, S., Posner, M.I. & Tucker, D.M. Psychol. Sci. 5, 303–). 11.

Yeung, N., Botvinic, M.M. & Cohen, J.D. Psychol. Rev. 111, 931–). 12.

Adorno, T.W., Frankel-Brunswick, E., Levinson, D.J. & Sanford, R.N. The Authoritarian Personality (Harper and Row, New York, 1950). 13. Kaplan, J.T., Freedman, J. & Iacoboni, M. Neuropsychologia 45, 55–).

14. Knutson, K.M., Wood, J.N., Spampinato, M.V. & Grafman, J. Soc. Neurosci. 1, 25–).

NATURE NEUROSCIENCE VOLUME 10 [ NUMBER 10 [ OCTOBER B R I E F COM M U N I CAT I O N S © N a tu re P u b lis h in g G ro u p h tt p :/ /w w w .n a tu re .c o m /n a tu re n e u ro sc ie n ce Job Application Letter for Graduate Without Experience 672 1st Avenue SE Cedar Rapids, IA 02055 April 5, 2016 Mr. Jim Carson Manager HR Residential Finance 837 SE Oxford Drive Cedar Rapids, IA 73635 Dear Mr. Carson: I am writing to apply for the Accounting Clerk position at Residential Finance, as advertised on your website. I will be graduating from Cedar Rapids Accountancy College at the end of this month. Having read about your company’s financial services extensively, I am convinced that you are the leader in providing services of this kind and would like to be associated with you in some capacity.

As an active member of the business club at school, my focus has always been towards accounting procedures as I believe that these are the core of any business. During mock sessions, I was provided with the opportunity to reconcile daily accounts and prepare varying financial reports. Balancing daily tank charts and auditing vaults have been two of my favorite activities during these sessions. My basic math skills, record keeping techniques and the ability to work with very little direction all point towards my suitability for this position. It would be an honor to speak with you personally about my prospects of working at this position for which I will call you next week.

I may be contacted at ( to provide information that you may need from me regarding my qualifications and eligibility for this position. Thank you for your time and consideration. I look forward to meeting with you soon. Sincerely, (Signature) Robert Jennings

Paper for above instructions

Introduction

The exploration of political ideologies such as liberalism and conservatism has sparked interest from both political scientists and psychologists. A notable study conducted by David M. Amodio and colleagues investigates the neurocognitive correlates of these two political orientations. The findings suggest substantial differences in cognitive processes related to political ideology, specifically regarding conflict monitoring mechanisms in the brain. This research highlights how abstract concepts like political orientation can manifest through observable neurocognitive patterns, an intersection of cognitive neuroscience and political psychology.

Distinct Cognitive Styles

Liberals and conservatives demonstrate notable differences in their cognitive styles. Research shows that conservatives tend to engage in more structured and persistent cognitive patterns, while liberals are more adaptable to ambiguity and complexity (Jost et al., 2003). This structural difference influences how each group processes information and responds to challenges. Conservatives typically exhibit higher needs for order and closure, whereas liberals display greater openness to experience and tolerance for ambiguity (Alford et al., 2005; Block & Block, 2006).
The grounded nature of this research stems from decades of behavioral studies that demonstrate these contrasting cognitive styles. For instance, analysis of personality variables associated with political views began at least fifty years ago, revealing consistent findings around individual differences based on ideology (Adorno et al., 1950). Significant implications arise from these distinctions, suggesting that individual cognitive processing mechanisms inherently align with political orientations.

Neurocognitive Mechanisms

The research conducted by Amodio et al. adopts a neurocognitive perspective, positing that these behavioral differences correlate with variations in brain activity, specifically in the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC). This region is critical for monitoring conflict and guiding adaptive responses when habitual behaviors must be reconsidered due to new information (Botvinick et al., 2001; Yeung et al., 2004).
In their study, the authors employed an event-related potentials (ERPs) approach to measure brain responses while participants engaged in a Go/No-Go task. This task requires rapid responses to familiar stimuli while withholding responses to conflicting ones. Notably, the researchers found that more liberal participants exhibited greater conflict-related ACC activity, which indicated a higher sensitivity to response conflicts. This finding was quantified through two ERP components, the error-related negativity (ERN) and No-Go N2, both of which aligned with greater liberalism associated with these neurocognitive activities (Amodio et al., 2007).
The results reflect that the more liberal disposition corresponds to a neurocognitive sensitivity allowing one to adapt responses in the presence of conflicting information, demonstrating superior self-regulatory abilities. Conversely, conservatives appeared less inclined to adapt their habitual responses, which may lead to errors in the context of tasks requiring flexibility.

Implications for Decision-Making

The implications of this research extend into the realms of decision-making and behavior within political contexts. The structured cognitive traits of conservatives might lead them to thrive in environments where rapid, consistent responses are necessary (Amodio et al., 2007). This tendency can manifest in more straightforward decision-making processes, which could simplify actions in complex environments. Conversely, liberals, who may demonstrate higher adaptability and openness to new experiences, could excel in scenarios requiring creative problem-solving and adaptability to change.
These cognitive styles reflect broader implications for political behavior. For instance, understanding how cognitive biases linked to liberalism or conservatism can influence decision-making may provide further insights into electoral behaviors, public opinions, and political polarization (Knutson et al., 2006; Kaplan et al., 2007).

Future Directions

The study by Amodio et al. opens avenues for further research regarding the connection between neurocognitive mechanisms and political psychology. Future studies could expand on these findings by incorporating demographic variables such as age, education, and cultural background. Additionally, exploring how neurocognitive correlates interact with social and environmental factors, such as exposure to diverse viewpoints or media influences, may yield profound insights into ideological development.
Furthermore, the potential for intervention strategies arises from understanding these cognitive styles. If certain cognitive patterns are linked with political ideologies, interventions aimed at enhancing flexibility and tolerance for ambiguity may promote cross-ideological conversations and mitigate polarization (Jost et al., 2017). This could foster a more harmonious political discourse in increasingly divided societies.

Conclusion

The work performed by Amodio et al. illustrates a critical intersection between political ideology and cognitive neuroscience, demonstrating how abstract constructs such as liberalism and conservatism can manifest neurologically. By uncovering the neurocognitive mechanisms behind response conflict sensitivity, this research contributes significantly to the understanding of political behavior and cognitive processes. The implications extend beyond academic discourse, suggesting avenues for practical applications aimed at improving political communication and reducing polarization.

References

1. Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F.J. (2003). Psychol. Bull., 129, 339-375.
2. Alford, J. R., Funk, C. L., & Hibbing, J. R. (2005). Am. Polit. Sci. Rev., 99, 153-167.
3. Block, J., & Block, J. H. (2006). J. Res. Pers., 40, 734-755.
4. Botvinick, M. M., Braver, T. S., Barch, D. M., Carter, C. S., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). Psychol. Rev., 108, 624-652.
5. Yeung, N., Botvinick, M. M., & Cohen, J. D. (2004). Psychol. Rev., 111, 931-959.
6. Knutson, K. M., Wood, J. N., Spampinato, M. V., & Grafman, J. (2006). Soc. Neurosci., 1, 25-39.
7. Kaplan, J. T., Freedman, J., & Iacoboni, M. (2007). Neuropsychologia, 45, 55-65.
8. Adorno, T. W., Frankel-Brunswick, E., Levinson, D. J., & Sanford, R. N. (1950). The Authoritarian Personality. Harper and Row.
9. Amodio, D. M., Jost, J. T., Master, S. L., & Yee, C. M. (2007). Nature Neuroscience, 10, 1246-1252.
10. Dehaene, S., Posner, M. I., & Tucker, D. M. (1994). Psychol. Sci., 5, 303-306.