The Briefing Room
General Category => Editorial/Opinion/Blogs => Topic started by: Sanguine on September 10, 2018, 09:30:33 pm
-
Some helpful background to understanding some the IDW concepts is that of the Big Five Personality traits. This has pretty much replaced/expanded the Jungian based Myers Briggs typology.
For those of us who are politically minded, it is of particular interest to see how these personality characteristics apply to political orientation. This article is a start. Keep in mind that many of the people who use the Big Five lean left and reside in ivory towers, so you and I will have some disagreements with some of the conclusions.
We’d all like to believe that human beings share the same set of values and motivations, but I think we know this just isn’t the case.
We’re all a product of both biological and environmental factors—otherwise known as nature and nurture. As to which force has the most effect on us, well, that’s one of the oldest philosophical arguments of mankind. It’s safe to say that it isn’t simply one and not the other that determines the type of person we are.
To me, psychology represents the meeting of these two factors, because it takes into account both our biological predisposition in relation to our socio-cultural influences.
That is where the “Big Five†Personality Trait studies come in...
https://www.elephantjournal.com/2018/02/the-big-five-personality-traits-what-they-mean-for-your-political-views/ (https://www.elephantjournal.com/2018/02/the-big-five-personality-traits-what-they-mean-for-your-political-views/)
-
This is another article, and a better set of conclusions, in my opinion.
Personality and Political Attitudes: Relationships across Issue Domains and Political Contexts
This is a review of Personality and Political Attitudes: Relationships across Issue Domains and Political Contexts (2010) by Alan S. Gerber, Gregory A. Huber, David Doherty, Conor M. Dowling, and Shang E. Ha. American Political Science Review 104 (February): 111-133. You can find the original in Google Scholar.
Conservatives are hard-working, organized, closed-minded, and emotionally stable. Liberals are lazy, disorganized, open-minded, and neurotic. Let’s see how the punditocracy spins that one.
Yesterday I wrote about Mondak et al.’s recent APSR article about personality and political participation. On the very next page of the same issue of APSR, you’ll find a closely related article by Gerber et al. Where Mondak et al. used the “Big Five†personality traits to predict participation in politics, Gerber et al. use the same “Big Five†traits to predict ideology.
Together, these two articles are a must-read. They help explain why genes and other biological factors might influence our political leanings. Biological factors (especially genetics) are the dominant cause of these Big Five personality traits, which then remain stable throughout life. In turn, these Big Five traits influence our political leanings (Gerber et al.) and our political activity (Mondak et al.).
The Big Five personality traits
Both articles adopt the “Big Five†approach that, they claim, has become widely accepted among psychologists. Quoting two psychologists, Gerber et al. sum up these big five traits as follows:...
http://abstractpolitics.com/2010/05/personality-and-political-attitudes-relationships-across-issue-domains-and-political-contexts/ (http://abstractpolitics.com/2010/05/personality-and-political-attitudes-relationships-across-issue-domains-and-political-contexts/)
-
To believe this you must first believe these arbitrary personality categories have meaning.
-
Interesting concept!
-
To believe this you must first believe these arbitrary personality categories have meaning.
To believe what you just said, you must believe these categories are arbitrary.
-
To believe what you just said, you must believe these categories are arbitrary.
I do.
-
I do.
OK. It's a free country.
-
(https://media.makeameme.org/created/junk-science.jpg)
-
(https://media.makeameme.org/created/junk-science.jpg)
Look, if you're going to come here and post cutsey pictures at least make a coherent comment about the topic. Which will require that you read it. *****rollingeyes*****
-
I read both articles and came to the same conclusion both times. Psychobabble.
-
I read both articles and came to the same conclusion both times.
Why so, @Bigun?
-
Why so, @Bigun?
Because the categories are arbitrary and people don't pigeonhole very well. For starters.
-
FTA at the OP:
4. People who were high in neuroticism leaned liberal on both.
:laugh:
-
Because the categories are arbitrary and people don't pigeonhole very well. For starters.
Arbitrary how? Defined arbitrarily? Measured arbitrarily? I'm not sure what you mean.
-
Arbitrary how? Defined arbitrarily? Measured arbitrarily? I'm not sure what you mean.
I mean they were pulled out of the ether by the authors. Their personal whims only.
-
Arbitrary how? Defined arbitrarily? Measured arbitrarily? I'm not sure what you mean.
Interesting, but I gotta agree it’s sometimes difficult to pigeonhole in this manner. As a crude example, I believe what I do because I’m rational, not because I’m not open minded. I can explain why I think what I think, and I can be convinced otherwise if a rational argument to the contrary is presented.
-
Arbitrary how? Defined arbitrarily? Measured arbitrarily? I'm not sure what you mean.
For one thing, personality is not fixed and is much, as they say, situational.
-
I mean they were pulled out of the ether by the authors. Their personal whims only.
@Bigun @skeeter - any measurement could be considered arbitrary. Why pick to measure length and width, for instance?
We measure length and width because it tells us something useful and predictable. If we know what the length and width are, we can predict how much stuff we can cram into that space.
Likewise, using these 5 measurements, we can predict a lot of things - behaviors, characteristics....and even politics. But, it has to be repeatable and accurately predict these things.
Make sense?
Sorry, @endicom, I should have pinged you too.
-
@Bigun @skeeter - any measurement could be considered arbitrary. Why pick to measure length and width, for instance?
We measure length and width because it tells us something useful and predictable. If we know what the length and width are, we can predict how much stuff we can cram into that space.
Likewise, using these 5 measurements, we can predict a lot of things - behaviors, characteristics....and even politics. But, it has to be repeatable and accurately predict these things.
Make sense?
Sorry, @endicom, I should have pinged you too.
I understand, I just disagree with the measurement standards offered here. Again, a basic example... can anyone imagine a more close minded individual than your typical liberal? Consider current atmosphere of western universities - rife with group think safe spaces and ‘hate speech’ rules.
In fairness they do name economic liberals specifically but I’m not really sure what that means.
-
Look, if you're going to come here and post cutsey pictures at least make a coherent comment about the topic. Which will require that you read it. *****rollingeyes*****
I read the damn article and it was a bunch of garbage trying to pigeon hole people into groups using blunt and inaccurate instruments. Junk Science.
-
@Bigun @skeeter - any measurement could be considered arbitrary. Why pick to measure length and width, for instance?
We measure length and width because it tells us something useful and predictable. If we know what the length and width are, we can predict how much stuff we can cram into that space.
Likewise, using these 5 measurements, we can predict a lot of things - behaviors, characteristics....and even politics. But, it has to be repeatable and accurately predict these things.
Make sense?
Sorry, @endicom, I should have pinged you too.
We measure length and width because we can. The mind is a measure apart.
Looong ago, I read something by, IIRC, a psychiatrist who said he'd always believed that mental health required a single personality. But he one day sat down to write overdue letters to people he knew. When finished something struck him and he re-read what he'd written. The personality displayed in his letters varied according to his relationship with the intended recipients. That altered his view of personalities.
-
I understand, I just disagree with the measurement standards offered here. Again, a basic example... can anyone imagine a more close minded individual than your typical liberal? Consider current atmosphere of western universities - rife with group think safe spaces and ‘hate speech’ rules.
In fairness they do name economic liberals specifically but I’m not really sure what that means.
Where did the liberal and economic liberal come in? I got lost.
-
@Bigun @skeeter - any measurement could be considered arbitrary. Why pick to measure length and width, for instance?
We measure length and width because it tells us something useful and predictable. If we know what the length and width are, we can predict how much stuff we can cram into that space.
Likewise, using these 5 measurements, we can predict a lot of things - behaviors, characteristics....and even politics. But, it has to be repeatable and accurately predict these things.
Make sense?
Sorry, @endicom, I should have pinged you too.
@sanquine
5 feet is 60 inches every single time. This stuff isn't like that at all.
-
@sanquine
5 feet is 60 inches every single time. This stuff isn't like that at all.
It is. It measures something useful, it does it accurately, and it allows for accurate, predictions. Now, I'll grant you that it isn't something you might want to measure, but that's not the point.
5 feet is 60 inches every time, because we (somewhat arbitrarily) defined it as such. The measurement isn't based on any natural law like an astronomical unit.
-
It is. It measures something useful, it does it accurately, and it allows for accurate, predictions. Now, I'll grant you that it isn't something you might want to measure, but that's not the point.
5 feet is 60 inches every time, because we (somewhat arbitrarily) defined it as such. The measurement isn't based on any natural law like an astronomical unit.
Are you suggesting that we can measure the personality traits of human beings like we do the length of pieces of lumber? If so, I think you are far off base.
-
Are you suggesting that we can measure the personality traits of human beings like we do the length of pieces of lumber? If so, I think you are far off base.
I think it's more like measuring the distance to a star. We can't lay a measuring tape against it like we do a 2x4, but yes, we can get measurements that work. And, we're not talking about a whole person's unique personality; we're talking about 5 measurable facets of a personality. That's all.
-
I think it's more like measuring the distance to a star. We can't lay a measuring tape against it like we do a 2x4, but yes, we can get measurements that work. And, we're not talking about a whole person's unique personality; we're talking about 5 measurable facets of a personality. That's all.
Ok. Maybe I'll get my head wrapped around that someday. Don't hold your breath.
-
Ok. Maybe I'll get my head wrapped around that someday. Don't hold your breath.
Heck no. I'm going to go have a glass of wine. That was almost like work.
-
Where did the liberal and economic liberal come in? I got lost.
The article split personality types into those who lean conservative & liberal on economic & social policy.
-
The article split personality types into those who lean conservative & liberal on economic & social policy.
Oh, ok. This bit:
1. People who were high in conscientiousness leaned conservative on economic policy (favoring hard work and organization as well as social policy (strict adherence to traditional social norms).
2. People who were high in openness leaned liberal on economic policy (favoring new programs and interventions) as well as social policy (favoring complexity and novelty).
3. People who were high in agreeableness leaned liberal on economic policy (wanting to help the disadvantaged) and leaned conservative on social policy (the desire to maintain harmony and traditional relationships).
4. People who were high in neuroticism leaned liberal on both.
....
The findings showed that high conscientiousness is the best predictor of conservative political belief, and high openness is the best predictor of liberal political belief. Conservatively-minded people are more likely to be organized and goal-oriented, whereas liberally-minded people are more likely to be creative and open to new ideas. Here’s an example: a liberal would be more inclined to come up with a good idea for a business, and the conservative would be more inclined to enact that idea through routine and repetition.
Is this it?
-
Oh, ok. This bit:
Is this it?
Yep. I believe the distinction between economic and social has much more to do with self interests than anything else.
-
Yep. I believe the distinction between economic and social has much more to do with self interests than anything else.
I've yet to meet a conservative welfare recipient.
-
Yep. I believe the distinction between economic and social has much more to do with self interests than anything else.
I'm not sure what you mean. It's a complex subject.
-
The US military has done intelligence and aptitude testing for 100+ years.
Three IQ tests that I took at ages 11 and 20 are within 2-3 points.
I firmly believe in testing, categorization, etc.
Most people will test closely over long times(repeatability)
These 5 categories are not "arbitrary," but instead the result of study over fairly lone timeframes.
Th e categories themselves, predate using them for political classification.
-
The US military has done intelligence and aptitude testing for 100+ years.
Three IQ tests that I took at ages 11 and 20 are within 2-3 points.
I firmly believe in testing, categorization, etc.
Most people will test closely over long times(repeatability)
These 5 categories are not "arbitrary," but instead the result of study over fairly lone timeframes.
Th e categories themselves, predate using them for political classification.
Excellent summary.
-
The US military has done intelligence and aptitude testing for 100+ years.
Oh yeah? Well then how did this dumb as a stump azzhole become a General?
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bf/General_Wesley_Clark_official_photograph%2C_edited.jpg/220px-General_Wesley_Clark_official_photograph%2C_edited.jpg)
-
Oh yeah? Well then how did this dumb as a stump azzhole become a General?
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bf/General_Wesley_Clark_official_photograph%2C_edited.jpg/220px-General_Wesley_Clark_official_photograph%2C_edited.jpg)
Grandfathered in.
-
The US military has done intelligence and aptitude testing for 100+ years.
Three IQ tests that I took at ages 11 and 20 are within 2-3 points.
I firmly believe in testing, categorization, etc.
Most people will test closely over long times(repeatability)
These 5 categories are not "arbitrary," but instead the result of study over fairly lone timeframes.
Th e categories themselves, predate using them for political classification.
Whether any of it means anything is something else altogether.
I test very high in IQ because my thinking process is based around determining options, and taking decisions within a rigid structure. Each option chosen results in a decision, which leads to more options, more decisions, and etc - Basically 'critical path' thinking... A grand process of elimination, leading to a result. And because I can build that structure out, into the future or beyond the circumstance, it becomes self predicting...
It works well for me - But I am also quite aware of my limits - And there are more fluid forms of thinking that in some instances would serve me better, that I am incapable of performing.
Most people can function in a more seat-of-the-pants way, falling into opportunities by chance, that I will never see because of my brooding. That is offset, because I make my own opportunities by design, but which is smarter is a question for the ages.
One seat-of-the-pants guy that I am thinking of particularly is my best friend. He has a quick wit, but he never has scores well in IQ tests. Low average, at best. We work very well together - I am far-seeing, and he is day-to-day, and never the twain shall meet. But put the two together...
But as a matter of intelligence, if asked which of us is smarter, I would be hard pressed to take that prize. His way is different than mine, but in no way less valid.
And that is the problem with setting standards. That which doesn't fit them is often valid anyway, and may actually perform far better than the predictable standards can assume.
JMO :shrug:
-
This is the adventurous type—those who climb mountains and take hallucinogens on the weekend.
Hopefully not at the same time... unless they're liberals.
-
Hopefully not at the same time... unless they're liberals.
You're more of the take hallucinogens and binge on Orange is the New Black type I take.
-
You're more of the take hallucinogens and binge on Orange is the New Black type I take.
Sure, I guess taking hallucinogens might be a way to get me to watch Orange is the New Black.
-
Sure, I guess taking hallucinogens might be a way to get me to watch Orange is the New Black.
Someone told me the show was modeled on your life.
-
Someone told me the show was modeled on your life.
Right, so why would I watch it again?
-
Right, so why would I watch it again?
For the shower scenes.
-
To believe this you must first believe these arbitrary personality categories have meaning.
I had worked several large pipeline projects with the same project manager. We clashed nearly everyday in meetings and private discussions. Our client put all the leadership team through a team building, 5 day class that focused on personality differences and how they impacted communication.
There was an immense improvement in the whole project team morale, better productivity and far less arguments for the following projects over a couple of years.
I strongly believe in these differences and categories. I have learned first hand how they impact how people hear and view decisions and other communication. It became very important to us in both understanding your own personality and those of other key people in your life. Number one comment after completing the class was a great desire for spouse to take the same class.
-
...One seat-of-the-pants guy that I am thinking of particularly is my best friend. He has a quick wit, but he never has scores well in IQ tests. Low average, at best. We work very well together - I am far-seeing, and he is day-to-day, and never the twain shall meet. But put the two together...
Key to that is each understanding their own and the other's strength and weakness. When you each give the other the decisions in their strength and your weakness, success often follows.
Otherwise, some will just consistently argue and accomplish little. Understanding the differences and accepting the difference is key to success. Learning the personality differences is one of the ways of understanding.
-
Key to that is each understanding their own and the other's strength and weakness. When you each give the other the decisions in their strength and your weakness, success often follows.
Otherwise, some will just consistently argue and accomplish little. Understanding the differences and accepting the difference is key to success. Learning the personality differences is one of the ways of understanding.
@thackney
That's right. And the value of a good CEO, or manager, or straw-boss is in recognizing those traits and clearing the path for efficiency by delegating tasking properly...
And NOT by being the 'adventurous type—those who climb mountains and take hallucinogens on the weekend.' *****rollingeyes*****
-
I had worked several large pipeline projects with the same project manager. We clashed nearly everyday in meetings and private discussions. Our client put all the leadership team through a team building, 5 day class that focused on personality differences and how they impacted communication.
There was an immense improvement in the whole project team morale, better productivity and far less arguments for the following projects over a couple of years.
Yeah... We do that too... Usually out behind the barn. Then beers.
:beer:
-
@thackney
That's right. And the value of a good CEO, or manager, or straw-boss is in recognizing those traits and clearing the path for efficiency by delegating tasking properly...
And NOT by being the 'adventurous type—those who climb mountains and take hallucinogens on the weekend.' *****rollingeyes*****
Yes, you got it! Some people make good managers, some people are natural-born entrepreneurs and NOT good managers. And, sheesh, no need to roll your eyes. What have I done to earn that?
-
Yeah... We do that too... Usually out behind the barn. Then beers.
:beer:
This project manager and I clashed badly for over a couple years. We both respected what each got done but was always pissed off at each other. Day two of that class was a huge light bulb going off for both of us.
We hated each other too much to consider meeting socially after work.
-
Yes, you got it! Some people make good managers, some people are natural-born entrepreneurs and NOT good managers. And, sheesh, no need to roll your eyes. What have I done to earn that?
Oh heck darlin... That wasn't at you. That was at the article, which I quoted.
As to the rest, entrepreneurs who are not good at management (unless they find a good right hand) are in the soup line.