Predisposed
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 19934895 |
|---|---|
| Authors | John R Hibbing (0000-0002-6922-2459), Katherine B Smith (0000-0003-0312-2284), Kevin B Smith (0000-0003-0424-9367), John R Alford (0000-0003-1866-8271) |
| Year | 2013 |
| Pages | 292 |
| Publication date | 2013-09-23 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | BOOK |
| Venue | Predisposed (SOURCE_BOOK) |
| Publisher | Routledge (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.4324/9780203112137 |
| OpenAlex | W4253318707 |
| Open Library | OL36210041M |
| ISBN | 9780203112137 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 62 |
Buried in many people and operating largely outside the realm of conscious thought are forces inclining us toward liberal or conservative political convictions. Our biology predisposes us to see and understand the world in different ways, not always reason and the careful consideration of facts. These predispositions are in turn responsible for a significant portion of the political and ideological conflict that marks human history. With verve and wit, renowned social scientists John Hibbing, Kevin Smith, and John Alford—pioneers in the field of biopolitics—present overwhelming evidence that people differ politically not just because they grew up in different cultures or were presented with different information. Despite the oft-heard longing for consensus, unity, and peace, the universal rift between conservatives and liberals endures because people have diverse psychological, physiological, and genetic traits. These biological differences influence much of what makes people who they are, including their orientations to politics. Political disputes typically spring from the assumption that those who do not agree with us are shallow, misguided, uninformed, and ignorant. Predisposed suggests instead that political opponents simply experience, process, and respond to the world differently. It follows, then, that the key to getting along politically is not the ability of one side to persuade the other side to see the error of its ways but rather the ability of each side to see that the other is different, not just politically, but physically. Predisposed will change the way you think about politics and partisan conflict. As a bonus, the book includes a "Left/Right 20 Questions" game to test whether your predispositions lean liberal or conservative
Climate Change Communication and Perception · Philosophy · Conservatism · Conservatisme · Essays · Free enterprise · General · Government · Konservativismus · Liberalism · Libéralisme · Liberalismus · National · Participation politique · Political Culture · Political participation · Political science · Political sociology · politics and government · Politische Psychologie · Reference · Sociologie politique · Verschiedenheit
Evolutionary Theory and Political Behavior
Facial Metrics, Aggression, and the Use of Military Force
What Does CSR Believe about Religion and CSR
Political ideologies as social strategies
Testing Theories of Threat, Individual Difference, and Ideology
Testing cognitive and interpersonal asymmetry vs. symmetry among voters in the 2020 Presidential primaries
I feel it in my gut
Parenting and Politics
Physiological responses and political behavior
Neurobiology and Politics
On Solid Ground
Toward a Shared Ideological Currency
Self-Reported Exposure and Beliefs About Misinformation Across a U.S. Presidential Election Cycle
The Cost of Political Differences to the Peace of Friendship
In your face
Differential brain activations between Democrats and Republicans when considering food purchases
Political taste
The effects of stress on political leadership evaluations
Neuropolitics
Political attitudes vary with detection of androstenone
Polls and Elections Some Folks You Just Can't Reach
Hector A. Garcia. Sex, Power, and Partisanship
Personality and political preferences over time
Inconsistent and very weak evidence for a direct association between childhood personality and adult ideology
Beyond the Ballot
I Guess You Twisted My Arm
With an Open Mind
Causation and Behavior
The impact of Covid‐19 and political identification on framing bias in an infectious disease experiment
Does Predisposition Toward Disgust Affect Emotional Response to Political Leaders? Evidence from the 2012 U.S. Presidential Election
Sociology’s Sacred Victims and the Politics of Knowledge
Ethnic Change, Personality, and Polarization Over Immigration in the American Public
Ask and You Shall Receive
Applying the Theory of Affective Intelligence to Support for Authoritarian Policies and Parties
A critical evaluation and research agenda for the study of psychological dispositions and political attitudes
The “Prejudiced Personality” and the Origins of Partisan Strength, Affective Polarization, and Partisan Sorting
Rethinking Compassion
Who Cares If They Need Help? The Deservingness Heuristic, Humanitarianism, and Welfare Opinions
Evolutionary Political Psychology
Candidate Evaluations Through the Lens of Adaptive Followership Psychology
Perceived Conflict and Leader Dominance
Political Ideology Outdoes Personal Experience in Predicting Support for Gender Equality
Upper‐Body Strength and Political Egalitarianism
Winning Faces Vary by Ideology
Choosing the Right Candidate
Out of Touch
Unfit for Democracy? Irrational, Rationalizing, and Biologically Predisposed Citizens
Beyond Regions and Ideology
Ideology Justifies Morality
The Deservingness Heuristic and the Politics of Health Care
Sharp as a Fox
From Barack Obama to Donald Trump
Beautiful Melodies Telling Me Terrible Things
Preference for realistic art predicts support for Brexit
Visual Presentation Style 2
No Evidence for Ideological Asymmetry in Dissonance Avoidance
Dispositional Fear and Political Attitudes
The dual evolutionary foundations of political ideology
Negativity Biases and Political Ideology
Une bombe dans la discipline
The Lincoln Project and the Conservative Aesthetic
Human cooperation at the national evolutionary synthesis center
| Unique citing works | 62 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 4,77 |
| Citation span | 2013 - 2026 (14) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 62 |