Dispositional Fear and Political Attitudes.

IF 2.2 2区 社会学 Q1 ANTHROPOLOGY Human Nature-An Interdisciplinary Biosocial Perspective Pub Date : 2020-12-01 Epub Date: 2020-12-03 DOI:10.1007/s12110-020-09378-1
Peter K Hatemi, Rose McDermott
{"title":"Dispositional Fear and Political Attitudes.","authors":"Peter K Hatemi,&nbsp;Rose McDermott","doi":"10.1007/s12110-020-09378-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Previous work proposes that dispositional fear exists predominantly among political conservatives, generating the appearance that fears align strictly along party lines. This view obscures evolutionary dynamics because fear evolved to protect against myriad threats, not merely those in the political realm. We suggest prior work in this area has been biased by selection on the dependent variable, resulting from an examination of exclusively politically oriented fears that privilege conservative values. Because the adaptation regulating fear should be based upon both universal and ancestral-specific selection pressures combined with developmental and individual differences, the elicitation of it should prove variable across the ideological continuum dependent upon specific combinations of fear and value domains. In a sample of ~ 1,600 Australians assessed with a subset of the Fear Survey Schedule II, we find fears not infused with political content are differentially influential across the political spectrum. Specifically, those who are more fearful of sharp objects, graveyards, and urinating in public are more socially conservative and less supportive of gay rights. Those who are more fearful of death are more supportive of gay rights. Those who are more fearful of suffocating and swimming alone are more concerned about emissions controls and immigration, while those who are more fearful of thunderstorms are also more anti-immigration. Contrary to existing research, both liberals and conservatives are more fearful of different circumstances, and the role of dispositional fears are attitude-specific.</p>","PeriodicalId":47797,"journal":{"name":"Human Nature-An Interdisciplinary Biosocial Perspective","volume":"31 4","pages":"387-405"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s12110-020-09378-1","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Nature-An Interdisciplinary Biosocial Perspective","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-020-09378-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/12/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Previous work proposes that dispositional fear exists predominantly among political conservatives, generating the appearance that fears align strictly along party lines. This view obscures evolutionary dynamics because fear evolved to protect against myriad threats, not merely those in the political realm. We suggest prior work in this area has been biased by selection on the dependent variable, resulting from an examination of exclusively politically oriented fears that privilege conservative values. Because the adaptation regulating fear should be based upon both universal and ancestral-specific selection pressures combined with developmental and individual differences, the elicitation of it should prove variable across the ideological continuum dependent upon specific combinations of fear and value domains. In a sample of ~ 1,600 Australians assessed with a subset of the Fear Survey Schedule II, we find fears not infused with political content are differentially influential across the political spectrum. Specifically, those who are more fearful of sharp objects, graveyards, and urinating in public are more socially conservative and less supportive of gay rights. Those who are more fearful of death are more supportive of gay rights. Those who are more fearful of suffocating and swimming alone are more concerned about emissions controls and immigration, while those who are more fearful of thunderstorms are also more anti-immigration. Contrary to existing research, both liberals and conservatives are more fearful of different circumstances, and the role of dispositional fears are attitude-specific.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
性格恐惧和政治态度。
先前的研究表明,性格恐惧主要存在于政治保守派中,造成了恐惧严格按照政党路线排列的表象。这种观点模糊了进化动力学,因为恐惧的进化是为了抵御无数的威胁,而不仅仅是政治领域的威胁。我们认为,之前在这一领域的工作由于对因变量的选择而存在偏见,这是由于对特权保守价值观的完全政治导向的恐惧的检查造成的。因为调节恐惧的适应应该基于普遍的和祖先特有的选择压力,结合发展和个体差异,它的激发应该在意识形态连续体中被证明是可变的,依赖于恐惧和价值领域的特定组合。在约1600名澳大利亚人的样本中,我们用恐惧调查附表二的一个子集进行了评估,我们发现,没有注入政治内容的恐惧在政治范围内的影响是不同的。具体来说,那些更害怕尖锐物品、墓地和在公共场所小便的人在社会上更保守,更不支持同性恋权利。那些更害怕死亡的人更支持同性恋权利。那些更害怕窒息和独自游泳的人更关心排放控制和移民,而那些更害怕雷暴的人也更反对移民。与现有的研究相反,自由主义者和保守主义者都对不同的环境更害怕,而且性格恐惧的作用是态度特定的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
8.00%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: Human Nature is dedicated to advancing the interdisciplinary investigation of the biological, social, and environmental factors that underlie human behavior. It focuses primarily on the functional unity in which these factors are continuously and mutually interactive. These include the evolutionary, biological, and sociological processes as they interact with human social behavior; the biological and demographic consequences of human history; the cross-cultural, cross-species, and historical perspectives on human behavior; and the relevance of a biosocial perspective to scientific, social, and policy issues.
期刊最新文献
Ecological Threats and Cultural Systems : Epidemics and Natural Disasters Do Not Predict Collectivism. The Nature and Motivation of Human Cooperation from Variant Public Goods Games. The Collector Hypothesis : Who Benefits More from Art, the Artist or the Collector? Hadza Landscape Burning. Focal Coordination and Language in Human Evolution.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1