OwenGregorian
Politics • Science & Tech • Education
Neurolinguistic priming reveals contrasting gender biases in Republicans and Democrats | Eric W. Dolan, PsyPost
December 11, 2024
post photo preview

A recent study provides evidence that political ideology shapes how people evaluate moral violations based on gender, with Republicans and Democrats exhibiting contrasting biases. Republicans judged authority violations by women and girls more harshly, while Democrats tended to judge such violations by men and boys as worse. These findings, published in The Journal of Social Psychology, shed light on how implicit biases can differ significantly across political lines.

The study aimed to explore how implicit gender biases influence moral judgments differently among Republicans and Democrats, given their distinct moral priorities and social values. By manipulating the timing of gender information in moral violation scenarios, the researchers sought to uncover how political ideology and framing effects shape evaluations of authority violations.

“When I was teaching biology in rural Kansas, I got really interested in how people maintain beliefs in the face of counterevidence. Since then, I have been looking specifically at how in-group membership influences cognition and beliefs,” said study author Brandon L. Bretl, an assistant professor at the University of Texas at Tyler.

The researchers employed an experimental survey design to investigate how political ideology influences gender biases in moral judgments. They recruited 826 participants from a United States census-matched sample, ensuring diverse representation in terms of age, gender, and political affiliation. The participants self-identified as either Democrats or Republicans, excluding independents.

The survey included a series of short moral violation scenarios, known as vignettes, designed to test reactions in two domains: authority violations, such as a student interrupting a teacher, and justice violations, such as cheating during a test.

Participants were randomly assigned to one of four experimental conditions that manipulated the gender of the vignette’s protagonist and the placement of gender-related information within the sentences. In some conditions, gender was introduced early in the vignette using a noun, while in others, it was introduced later through a pronoun. This manipulation aimed to test the influence of timing on gender stereotype activation.

“Our brains use different neural circuits for different tasks,” Bretl told PsyPost. “The processing done by those circuits happens very quickly—often in less than a tenth of a second. Even so, some processes don’t happen quickly enough in certain contexts. For example, in this study, I asked people to judge written scenarios of men and women committing moral violations. I then changed the gender of the person committing the violation between two experimental conditions.

“I also varied the placement of gender information in two additional conditions, presenting it either at the beginning of the sentence with a noun (‘You see a woman…’) or later in the sentence using a pronoun (‘You see a student…her…’). The idea was that moral judgments occur rapidly, so in cases where we expect a gender bias—for example, a woman disrespecting authority—we could mitigate that bias by presenting gender information later in the sentence.”

After reading each vignette, participants rated the severity of the moral violation on a five-point scale, ranging from “not bad” to “extremely bad.” To ensure results were not influenced by unrelated factors, the researchers controlled for variables such as participant sex, religiosity, and the strength of political affiliation.

The findings revealed distinct patterns of gender bias influenced by political ideology. Republicans rated authority violations by women and girls as more severe than those committed by men and boys when gender information appeared early in the sentence. This pattern suggests that traditional gender norms emphasizing female deference to authority may be particularly salient among Republican participants. Interestingly, this bias disappeared when gender information was introduced later in the sentence, implying that subtle shifts in how information is framed can reduce implicit biases.

In contrast, Democrats showed the opposite bias in their evaluations of authority violations. They rated male protagonists as more culpable than female protagonists, particularly when gender was introduced early in the vignette. This pattern may reflect a sensitivity to social equity issues and an overcorrection for perceived biases against women, resulting in harsher judgments of male authority violators. As with Republicans, the timing of gender information affected these judgments, with late gender cues reducing the observed bias.

“The bias against boys and men committing authority violations among Democrats surprised me,” Bretl said. “One explanation is an ‘overcorrection bias,’ where Democrats, being aware of biases against women, have worked to overcome those biases but end up overshooting the mark. More research is needed to confirm this.”

In scenarios involving justice violations, such as cheating or dishonesty, neither Republicans nor Democrats exhibited significant gender bias. This finding underscores the domain-specific nature of implicit biases, as justice violations—focused on fairness and harm—may not activate the same gendered stereotypes as authority violations. The results highlight how moral judgments are shaped not only by political ideology but also by the context in which violations occur and the way information is presented.

“The key takeaways from this study are: 1) gender biases function in highly nuanced ways, 2) Republicans are biased against girls and women committing authority violations, while Democrats are biased against boys and men committing authority violations, and 3) the gender of the protagonist does not influence ratings of justice violations,” Bretl explained. “This is relevant in contexts like status offenses—crimes punishable because of the offender’s age, such as truancy or underage drinking—because these authority-based offenses are the only area of the criminal justice system where girls outnumber boys.”

The study introduces a novel method for examining implicit biases by manipulating the presentation of gender information in moral scenarios. However, the study has limitations. The vignettes primarily featured youth protagonists, which may not fully capture biases related to adult authority figures. Additionally, the findings are specific to the polarized political and cultural context of the United States in 2023.

“This study focused on U.S. participants during a time of heightened political polarization,” Bretl noted. “The findings might not generalize to other cultural or political contexts. Also, while we controlled for factors like age and religiosity, biases related to age or other demographic traits might still play a role.”

Read more:

https://www.psypost.org/neurolinguistic-priming-reveals-contrasting-gender-biases-in-republicans-and-democrats/

 

 

community logo
Join the OwenGregorian Community
To read more articles like this, sign up and join my community today
0
What else you may like…
Videos
Posts
Articles
Over 100 Navy SEALS Set to Descend on Washington D.C. in Explosive Show of Support for Army Veteran Pete Hegseth | The Gateway Pundit

Washington, D.C., is bracing for an unprecedented show of support as over 100 Navy SEALs prepare to descend on the nation’s capital, standing in solidarity with President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee for Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth.

Hegseth, a decorated Army combat veteran and prominent conservative voice, has faced relentless media attacks in recent weeks.

The fake news media have leveled accusations ranging from outdated and disproven sexual misconduct claims to allegations of public drunkenness and financial mismanagement during his tenure at Concerned Veterans for America (CVA).

Critics on the right are pushing back hard against what they view as a deliberate effort to derail a nominee poised to shake up the Defense Department.

Randy Lair, a trustee at CVA, categorically denied the whistleblower allegations, describing them as “sensational fabrications designed to undermine a patriot.”

In an exclusive letter to the New York Post, Lair emphasized that Hegseth left CVA on good ...

00:01:07
‘Charlatan’ Vaccine Promoter Dr. Peter Hotez Says Multiple Viruses Will be Unleashed on America the Day After Trump Takes Office | Cristina Laila, The Gateway Pundit

‘Charlatan’ vaccine promoter Dr. Peter Hotez said multiple viruses will be unleashed on America one day after Trump is inaugurated next month.

“We have some big picture stuff coming down the pike starting on January 21st,” Hotez said to MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace before rattling off a list of viruses:

  • Bird flu
  • New Coronavirus
  • SARS
  • Mosquito-transmitted viruses
  • Dengue
  • Zika
  • Oropouche virus
  • Yellow fever
  • Pertussis/Whooping cough
  • Measles
  • Polio

Of course, Dr. Hotez failed to mention the measles outbreaks and Polio cases are primarily a problem with the illegal migrants invading the US.

Dr. Peter Hotez previously made headlines for refusing to debate author, activist, then-presidential candidate, attorney and now Trump’s nominee for HHS, Robert Kennedy, Jr., on the effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccines.

Rather than accept the challenge, Hotez lashed out at both Robert Kennedy Jr. and Joe Rogan, who invited the two to debate the facts on his show.

Hotez refused and ...

00:01:30
Mysterious 'Car-Sized Drones' Over New Jersey Prompt FBI Investigation | ZeroHedge

Several weeks of mysterious drone swarms over the skies of one New Jersey county near the military research and manufacturing facility Picatinny Arsenal have sparked concerns among residents and prompted an FBI investigation.

"It's kind of unsettling," Mike Walsh, a Morris County resident who has spotted the drones on numerous occasions, told local media outlet PIX11 News.

He said some drones "are very big, probably the size of a car."

Since Nov. 18, Walsh and many other residents have spotted these drones in the night sky.

"They're kind of go slow," he said, adding, "They come towards you. Then they change direction a little. They're all going different ways."

We first detailed the story on Nov. 19 in a note titled "Spy Drones? "Unusual Activity" Reported Over Morris County, New Jersey, Near Military Research Facility."

The potential national security threat piqued our interest, considering multiple reports that the mysterious drones were observed near Picatinny Arsenal.

PIX11 News said...

00:02:18
Coffee With Scott Adams Afterparty X Spaces - 2/22/25

You are invited to join the next CWSA Afterparty X Spaces, today after Scott’s morning livestream!

https://x.com/owengregorian/status/1893281334623125857?s=46&t=za1kQOtu4Dod6Yb1P465eg

Coffee With Scott Adams Afterparty Spaces - 2/15/25

The next CWSA Afterparty X Spaces is today, and you’re invited!

As usual we’ll start a few minutes after Scott’s morning livestream ends.

https://x.com/owengregorian/status/1890748504206696532?s=46&t=za1kQOtu4Dod6Yb1P465eg

hey Greg, I like that you are doing a regular show and I don't want to criticize because that's what it's going to sound like so I'm going to start with that. I think you're doing a great job finding stories and exposing all kinds of science that we would never be exposed to otherwise.

but

it's really hard to get into a show when it's just a constant echo chamber. what I would like to see is if you could offer like people to raise their hands if they have the counter argument or a counterpoint to what we just heard. ... they talk a lot about wanting to get the people on either side to look at our point of views and they aren't going to listen to people who don't present their arguments. I think you'll grab a wider audience and it'll be much more interesting

post photo preview
I played a small part in making some news here.

This story focuses on Elon Musk of course, as the news tends to focus on every X post or reply he makes.

If you read this story, you may have noticed that it quotes Scott Adams' reaction to a previous story about the idea of issuing $5,000 "DOGE dividend" checks, questioning why we would do that when we are facing such massive budget deficits and an enormous national debt. Elon responded to that stating that he thought we needed to balance the budget first.

 

 

This isn't the only story written about this.

What it doesn't state is that my post about the $5,000 DOGE check idea is what prompted this whole conversation. 😎

https://x.com/OwenGregorian/status/1892184391717384462

It's also notable that the whole thing started with an X post from James Fishback (@j_fishback) that included a letter he wrote with a detailed proposal about the idea:

https://x.com/j_fishback/status/1891933120313663493

It's still a trip to think that an ordinary person like me can have even a small impact on the national conversation.

Don't underestimate the influence what you do on this platform could have. And thank you for your support, and for coming along this strange journey with me.

Read full Article
post photo preview
4th Generation Information Warfare

John Boyd and William S. Lind changed our understanding of modern warfare, and their ideas can help you in business, politics, influencing people, and lots more.

John Boyd was a fighter pilot in the US Air Force, and later became a military strategist and advised the Pentagon. He wrote many essays on how the nature of warfare was changing and what we should do about it. William S. Lind wrote a book called The 4th Generation Warfare Handbook that included many of Boyd's ideas which has been influential to how we approach warfighting. 

I'm going to describe some of the key concepts and frameworks covered in that book, and how they can be applied to information warfare. I'm hoping you'll come away with enough understanding that you can notice when these techniques are being applied, judge how well various players are doing with them to help predict how a conflict will turn out, and be able to start practicing these techniques yourself.

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
Read full Article
post photo preview
Poll Shows Post-Election Crash in Public Tolerance for Illegal Migration | Neil Munro, Breitbart News

Just 10 percent of Americans oppose President Donald Trump’s promise to deport illegal migrants with criminal records, according to an Ipsos poll for the New York Times.

In contrast, 87 percent support the deportations strongly or “somewhat,” so providing a broad consensus for a national enforcement campaign.

And just 19 percent of Americans — fewer than one in five — strongly oppose “deporting all immigrants who are here illegally,” the Ipsos poll also showed. Fifty-six percent support the deportations strongly or somewhat.

The post-election collapse of tolerance for illegal migration was spotlighted Saturday when the newspaper posted its early-January poll of 2,128 citizens and residents that confirmed recent polling trends.

The broad shift in political opinion — dubbed a “preference cascade” by academics —  was likely caused when Trump’s campaign and November win showed Americans how many other Americans oppose migration.

The new numbers will help Trump and his deputies begin the careful, low-drama, and gradual removal of millions of wage-cutting, rent-spiking migrants from U.S. society.

A patient and popular enforcement campaign will also help shift the political attention to the even bigger impact of legal migration on Americans.

Already, the rising public demand for less legal migration was spotlighted over Christmas when Twitter erupted in a furious debate over white-collar migration via the H-1B visa program. That drama was ignored by the poll but is expected to rise as the nation draws closer to the 2026 election.

Pro-migration groups, however, hope the Trump enforcement is chaotic and rushed because any tactical mistakes will help their media allies paint the repatriations as cruel and counterproductive.

The newspaper’s coverage of the poll downplays the drama, saying:

Many Americans who otherwise dislike President-elect Donald J. Trump share his bleak assessment of the country’s problems and support some of his most contentious prescriptions to fix them, according to a new poll from The New York Times and Ipsos.

The new poll includes much evidence that GOP voters are leading Democrats away from their politically disastrous support for the quasi-open borders policies put in place by President Joe Biden’s pro-migration, Cuban-born border chief, Alejandro Mayorkas.

For example, only 16 percent of Democrats oppose the deportation of criminal migrants, and only 34 percent of Democrats now “strongly” oppose the deportation of “all immigrants [emphasis added] who are here illegally.”

Overall, 55 percent want all migrants to be deported, and 87 percent want crminal migrants to be deported.

These numbers — and the approaching 2026 midterm elections — help to explain why a critical share of Senate Democrats are expected on Monday to support the Laken Riley bill that would allow the detention of criminal migrants.

Similarly, 56 percent said the Mayorkas migration has caused more crime. Just 38 percent — including 63 percent of Democrats, said the migration “doesn’t have much impact on crime.”

The poll said that 41 percent of Americans, including 68 percent of GOP voters — say “immigrants today are a burden on our country because they take our jobs, housing and health care.” However, the “forced choice” question did not offer alternative answers, so it prodded 56 percent of respondents to say immigrants “strengthen our country because of their hard work and talents.”

There is much evidence that legal and illegal migration makes ordinary Americans poor and less productive.

Elsewhere in the poll, Ipsos asked if there were too many or too few legal migrants.

Thirty percent said too many, and just 24 percent said too few. But the plurality of 43 percent picked a middle option — “the right number” — likely because the respondents do not know that Biden’s deputies imported roughly one migrant for every American birth since 2021.

Read more:

https://www.breitbart.com/immigration/2025/01/18/poll-shows-post-election-crash-in-public-tolerance-for-illegal-migration/

 

 

Read full Article
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals