Liberal bias in science?

[Quantum Windbag]

I am highlighting this because I see it as evidence that some people will take a finding that, on its face is neutral at worst, and turn it into a negative against conservatives.

Liberals might be more likely than conservatives to check out what you are looking at, according to a study published online November 4 in Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics. Experiments show that people take longer to notice when an object appears if they have first seen a face looking in the other direction. Now a team of psychologists and poli*tical scientists at the University of Nebraska–Lincoln report that whereas liberals do just that, conservatives do not. The researchers asked 72 undergraduates to look at a drawing of a face that looked to the left or right of a computer screen and then press a key when a black dot appeared. Despite being told the face would not predict the dot’s location, liberals took 10 to 20 milliseconds longer—about 5 percent—to notice the dot when the face looked away from it instead of toward it, indicating that they had followed the face’s gaze. Conservatives did not—they took the same amount of time regardless of where the face looked. Study co-author Kevin Smith says one possible explanation is that “liberals are more sensitive
to social cues,” such as where someone looks, whereas conservatives value individual indepen*dence. Whatever the explanation, the results bolster the idea that political dispositions depend in part on differences in how people use social information.

What Are You Looking At? Conservatives May Be Less Sensitive to Certain Social Cues: Scientific American

I could see this as proof that conservatives are more observant, but the researchers seem to think it means they are less observant. How is seeing the dot faster evidence that they are paying less attention to anything? Especially since they are supposed to be looking for the dot?

 

[Ravi]

Conservatives are anal and have no imagination. That's why only 6% of them are scientists: they do what they are told to do, when they are told to do it and make every effort to ignore reality.

 

[R.D.]

The liberals waited to follow an imaginary lead while conservatives took the lead. But the spin is

“liberals are more sensitive to social cues"

how about "liberals are slow on the uptake"

 

[Yoda]

Conservatives are anal and have no imagination. That's why only 6% of them are scientists: they do what they are told to do, when they are told to do it and make every effort to ignore reality.

I think the term "liberal" might be being abused here. I wouldn't put it as in the current political spectrum of the term.

I guess you could call science "liberal" because it's forever changing, but science has to be that way. If it wasn't, then it would simply stop testing and studying and become pointless.

As far as the political spectrum of the term. It could only be viewed as "liberal" because of the theories based upon evolution and cloning, which is usually to the dismay of the of the religious "conservative right".

Outside of that, I know of scientist who come from all different beliefs and are both conservative and liberal.

 

[asterism]

Conservatives are anal and have no imagination. That's why only 6% of them are scientists: they do what they are told to do, when they are told to do it and make every effort to ignore reality.

By finding the dot faster?

Also, you say that 6% of conservatives are scientists. What percentage of liberals are scientists and where did you get that information?

 

[Ravi]

Conservatives are anal and have no imagination. That's why only 6% of them are scientists: they do what they are told to do, when they are told to do it and make every effort to ignore reality.

By finding the dot faster?

Also, you say that 6% of conservatives are scientists. What percentage of liberals are scientists and where did you get that information?

It's common knowledge. It has been posted here at USMB at least 1,000 times.

 

[xsited1]

Conservatives are anal and have no imagination. That's why only 6% of them are scientists: they do what they are told to do, when they are told to do it and make every effort to ignore reality.

It's rdean's sock puppet!!!!

 

[asterism]

Conservatives are anal and have no imagination. That's why only 6% of them are scientists: they do what they are told to do, when they are told to do it and make every effort to ignore reality.

By finding the dot faster?

Also, you say that 6% of conservatives are scientists. What percentage of liberals are scientists and where did you get that information?

It's common knowledge. It has been posted here at USMB at least 1,000 times.

You're not too bright are you?

 

[xsited1]

By finding the dot faster?

Also, you say that 6% of conservatives are scientists. What percentage of liberals are scientists and where did you get that information?

It's common knowledge. It has been posted here at USMB at least 1,000 times.

You're not too bright are you?

Probably trolling. Anyway, rdean and modbert had posted the results of a Pew Poll where only 6% of Scientists identified themselves as Republicans. (I don't remember the sample size or the details of the poll.) Of course there are conservative Republicans, conservative Democrats and conservative Independents, but those are just tiny details.

 

[asterism]

It's common knowledge. It has been posted here at USMB at least 1,000 times.

You're not too bright are you?

Probably trolling. Anyway, rdean and modbert had posted the results of a Pew Poll where only 6% of Scientists identified themselves as Republicans. (I don't remember the sample size or the details of the poll.) Of course there are conservative Republicans, conservative Democrats and conservative Independents, but those are just tiny details.

Read what she said again.

 

[Truthmatters]

Ignoring what is in front of their face to please the researcher by pressing the button really fast.

The one group of people who saw the dot assumed that seeing the dot is what was important.

The one group who paid more attention to what was there seemed more interested in the human face than pleasing the researcher by finding the dot really quick.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Conservatives are anal and have no imagination. That's why only 6% of them are scientists: they do what they are told to do, when they are told to do it and make every effort to ignore reality.

rdean, when did you change you avatar?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Conservatives are anal and have no imagination. That's why only 6% of them are scientists: they do what they are told to do, when they are told to do it and make every effort to ignore reality.

By finding the dot faster?

Also, you say that 6% of conservatives are scientists. What percentage of liberals are scientists and where did you get that information?

It's common knowledge. It has been posted here at USMB at least 1,000 times.

It actually hasn't. The statistic that has been posted is that 6% of scientists are Republicans. The fact that you do not know the difference indicates something, but I doubt you understand what it is.

 

[Ravi]

By finding the dot faster?

Also, you say that 6% of conservatives are scientists. What percentage of liberals are scientists and where did you get that information?

It's common knowledge. It has been posted here at USMB at least 1,000 times.

You're not too bright are you?

No, but I'm a lot brighter than you, apparently.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Ignoring what is in front of their face to please the researcher by pressing the button really fast.

The one group of people who saw the dot assumed that seeing the dot is what was important.

The one group who paid more attention to what was there seemed more interested in the human face than pleasing the researcher by finding the dot really quick.

Thanks for making my point.

 

[Ravi]

By finding the dot faster?

Also, you say that 6% of conservatives are scientists. What percentage of liberals are scientists and where did you get that information?

It's common knowledge. It has been posted here at USMB at least 1,000 times.

It actually hasn't. The statistic that has been posted is that 6% of scientists are Republicans. The fact that you do not know the difference indicates something, but I doubt you understand what it is.

Yes, I should have said "conservatives."

 

[edthecynic]

Conservatives are anal and have no imagination. That's why only 6% of them are scientists: they do what they are told to do, when they are told to do it and make every effort to ignore reality.

By finding the dot faster?

Also, you say that 6% of conservatives are scientists. What percentage of liberals are scientists and where did you get that information?

55% according to a 2009 PEW Research report.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

Conservatives are anal and have no imagination. That's why only 6% of them are scientists: they do what they are told to do, when they are told to do it and make every effort to ignore reality.

the reality they are supposed to look for is the little dot. they find it substantially faster than the liberals, who are more into social cues, that is following the herd, than objective reality in front of them.

That shows that Liberals are more likely to worry about opinion than reality, and they are slower to recognize reality. About 5% slower.

 

[edthecynic]

The liberals waited to follow an imaginary lead while conservatives took the lead. But the spin is

“liberals are more sensitive to social cues"

how about "liberals are slow on the uptake"

How about "CON$ are antisocial"

 

[daveman]

Ignoring what is in front of their face to please the researcher by pressing the button really fast.

The one group of people who saw the dot assumed that seeing the dot is what was important.

The one group who paid more attention to what was there seemed more interested in the human face than pleasing the researcher by finding the dot really quick.

So you're saying the liberals were too stupid to follow the researcher's directions.