In his book “Snoop” as well as his academic research, University of Texas psychologist Sam Gosling has shown that people of different political persuasions have somewhat different living spaces. By knowing where to look and what to look for, one can make an educated guess of political beliefs of people one has never talked to, least of all about politics.

It appears that one can glean political beliefs from pets as well. In our Zogby Interactive survey conservatives turned out to be somewhat more likely than liberals to own dogs (46.1% vs. 34.9%) while liberals were somewhat more likely to own cats (40.7% of liberals own cats compared to 34.9% of conservatives).

Since there are more conservatives than liberals and they are not equally likely to own pets, guessing politics from pets has still a way to go. At this point we are merely wondering if you think this apparent pattern is a coincidence or does it reflect some sort of underlying psychology? And – obviously – are you a cat or a dog person?

Zeljka ideology, psychology politics, psychology, zogby

In his book “The Blank Slate”, psychologist Steven Pinker has, among other things, criticized the “noble savage” view of human nature. According to this view, people are by nature generous and non-aggressive, however, as they grow up they get corrupted by the existing culture. Consequently, vast majority of social problems can be solved by changing culture and returning to the age of innocence. Pinker, on the other hand, used psychological, historical and archaeological evidence to argue that such times never existed.

Our data show that a vast majority of people appear to be endorsing the noble savage view of human nature. Overall, 55% percent of Americans agree with the view, “generally speaking, people are born nice and generous, but the existing culture gradually corrupts them”. Perhaps surprisingly, there are no generational differences and ideological differences are almost negligible.

What is your view of the “noble savage” hypothesis?

Zeljka culture, first globals, future, ideology, psychology culture

Some psychologists believe that people gravitate to different ideologies because they hold different values and tastes. According to this general view, liberals and conservatives want different things, and, as a result, they are inevitably drawn towards different visions of society that is promoted by politicians of different parties. These different visions are not rationally chosen but are to a significant extent based on emotions and perhaps even innate preferences. Just a few days ago, for example, we discussed the possibility that conservatives are more easily disgusted than liberals.

Some of us at Zogby believe that this approach to ideology might be incomplete. Recently, we surveyed almost 5000 Americans to see what they believe about basic economic mechanisms. Though our questions were non-ideological, we found great differences among people of different ideologies regarding their economic beliefs – things that they believe to be the case, not that they would prefer to be the case. In fact, we found the correlation between economic beliefs and ideology to be almost three times stronger than between ideology and disgust, suggesting a significant role for knowledge and reasoning in ideological positioning. We presented these findings at the recent American Psychological Society Convention in San Francisco.

What is your view of the role of factual disagreements in ideology? Do you believe differing ideologies primarily result from our differing values or from our different beliefs about the world?

Zeljka economics, ideology, politics, psychology ideology, war, zogby

In his New York Times column today, Nicholas Kristof explores how psychological factors seem to pre-determine whether you are liberal or conservative. Kristof writes:

Studies suggest that conservatives are more often distressed by actions that seem disrespectful of authority, such as slapping Dad. Liberals don’t worry as long as Dad has given permission.

Likewise, conservatives are more likely than liberals to sense contamination or perceive disgust. People who would be disgusted to find that they had accidentally sipped from an acquaintance’s drink are more likely to identify as conservatives. 

The upshot is that liberals and conservatives don’t just think differently, they also feel differently. This may even be a result, in part, of divergent neural responses.

The point about authority and ideology doesn’t break new ground, but the notion of disgust being tied to ideology is interesting. Kristof links to www.yourmorals.org,  which provides psychological tests that measure a number of attitudes, including your tolerance for things disgusting. You can see your score relative to the norm as determined by others who took the test. Another test on the site measures political ideology.

I took the “disgust” test and found I am more easily disgusted than the norm. A firewall issue blocked me from taking the ideology test. However, I know my political beliefs, and they don’t correlate with my score on the disgust scale. Maybe that is because I am conservative in my lifestyle and behavior, but liberal politically.

How much credence do you put in psychological factors as an indicator of political beliefs?  If we are hard-wired to be conservatives or liberals, is it possible to change people’s minds?

Paul ideology, politics, psychology ideology, lifestyle

That seems to be the attitude of a majority of people as it regards the flu.
Zogby Interactive completed a survey on May 6 for the University of Texas that looked at attitudes and behaviors on that topic.

Here is some of what we found:
* 36% of adults polled say they received an influenza vaccine for the current flu season.
* 30% say they would get a special vaccine for the swine flu if one was made available.
* 38% are unvaccinated, not practicing good hygiene, and not restricting travel or mall shopping.
* 18% of respondents nationwide rate the swine flu as being a severe threat.

“People know the symptoms of flu, but most do not realize vaccination, treatment, and hygiene save lives,” said Dr Ward Casscells, the John Edward Tyson Distinguished Professor in Cardiology at The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston and a Senior Scholar and Special Advisor to the President, Texas Heart Institute. “A new strategy is needed to educate and motivate the skeptical, cavalier, and defiant ‘Killer Karls’.”

Do you get flu shots? Is the threat of swine flu overblown? Or are people taking a “it can’t happen to me” attitude?

Paul Uncategorized, health, lifestyles, psychology health, shopping, travel, war, zogby

American psychologist Arie Kruglanski has discovered that people vary in terms of how willing and able they are to deal with ambiguity and conflict. Some people prefer order and predictability in their lives that others can live without. Some people have an easier time dealing with conflicting information as well as listening to those who oppose their views. Kruglanski labeled this group of behavioral tendencies “need for closure.”

Our Zogby Interactive data showed some generational differences on this dimension. First Globals™ are the group most likely to agree that “when considering most conflict situations, I can usually see how both sides can be right.” Only 15% of First Globals™ disagreed with this statement, compared to 27% Nikes (those born between 1965 and 1978), 27% Woodstocks (those born between 1946 and 1964) and 25% Privates (those born between 1929 and 1945).

Do you believe that First Globals™ are in fact more likely to appreciate differing point of view? If you do, what is it this generation that would make them capable of it?

Zeljka first globals, future, psychology first globals, zogby

Most people think they are better than average in most things. For example, surveys have found that most students believe that they are more popular than the average student and one survey of high-school seniors found that less than 1% thought of themselves as being below average in their ability to “get along with others.” Our fall 2008 interactive survey data show that something similar might be going on when in people’s perception of how well they are managing their own finances.

We found that most Americans believe that they live within their means. For example, 78% of First Globals™ say they live within their means and 89% of those over 65 say so as well. Is there anybody that doesn’t? Yes: Most other Americans. In the same survey, 88% of First Globals™ disagreed with the statement that “most Americans live within their means.” And, remarkably, just 4% are “not sure” about this issue.

Are Americans too easy on themselves, conveniently redefining frugal livings to fit their own behavior? Or are they too harsh on others because consumption is more conspicuous than saving? Perhaps, when answering questions about themselves, people rely on their own experiences, while when answering questions about others they draw on old clichés about waste and over-spending. Will the nation’s current economic woes change these perceptions?

Zeljka psychology consumption, economy, first globals, lifestyle