Liberals three times more biased than conservatives when evaluating ideologically opposite individuals, study finds
-
You can find the Abstract and other links to the study here;
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00224545.2024.2316619ABSTRACT
This study tested the notion of ideological asymmetry, which proposes that conservatives are more prejudiced than liberals. It involved 682 self-identified conservative (n = 383) and liberal (n = 299) perceivers (MTurk workers; 54% female) who evaluated a target person’s professional attributes, personal character, and job suitability based on the target’s social media posts. The results did not support ideological asymmetry as both conservative and liberal participants negatively evaluated an ideologically opposite target. Interestingly, liberals showed three times more bias than conservatives. This study better supports a worldview conflict hypothesis, an alternative to ideological asymmetry, with both sides showing indirect aggression in an apolitical setting.
NOTE: Bolding by me.
-
-
Real life. It's far harder to tell lib friends you've stopped being lib, than it is to tell straight friends you're gay.
-
@raphjd Biases result in making sweeping generalizations about people; for example, when someone support Palestinian statehood and it then accused of supporting rape and anti-Semitism.
Ring a bell?
-
@jaroonn No
What rings a bell: Libs who hate it & can't handle it, when reminded of (awful, indefensible) positions they've taken.
-
The study was about how conservatives were supposed to be the evil ones, but it found that you losers are 3 times worse.
It's like how liberal women have the highest rate of mental illness and conservative men have the lowest, as found in at least 2 studies.
It reminds me of when the German gov did a study on DV and found that 70% of one-sided DV was by the woman. Harvard lost their liberal rag and wanted to prove that totally wrong. Instead, Harvard came out with slightly (1 or 2%) higher results.
-
@raphjd Given that deflection, I will assume that you know exactly what I was talking about.
Perhaps, since you are part of the "less evil" group, I can expect better from you in the future?
-
.... rather than change his own behavior, @jaroonn doubtless means.
-
I'm already better than you.
-
@raphjd LOL...a legend in your own mind. Nice.
Have a good day
-
just fyi..... Back on theme of libs who take positions indefensible.... & hate to be reminded.....
some @jaroonn indefensible positions
-
he supports & defends Azov Nazis - or denies their existence, similar effect in practice
-
excuses/explains dictators who cancel elections
-
defends Planned Parenthood's modern-day defense of Margaret Sanger's racist genocide against Blacks: https://community.gaytorrent.ru/topic/65129/21-quotes-by-margaret-sanger-that-will-probably-make-you-sick/
-
defends White libs who put non-lib Blacks in their (supposed) place: https://community.gaytorrent.ru/topic/64627/trump-supporter-vs-liberal-debate
-
defends rapists: Joe Biden, Bill & Hillary Clinton
-
thinks men can have working womb & breasts, women can have penis
-
wants 'P' in LGBT* acronym, even though effect of supposed "Pansexual" is pedophile inclusion
Only a sample. Others could add more.
-
-
He claims that he only recently (from me) heard the term MAP.
This is even though it's his fellow professors who have been pushing that term for the last 25ish years.
He's the most clueless person I've ever met. Everyone else knows things going on within their own profession.
-
@raphjd Oh that's right. He'll deny something's existence for years.... then do minimum acknowledge by saying, Oh I just never heard of it before, you didn't tell me..
He thinks Woke-DEI extreme racism is "beautiful" (his word).
& thinks CNN, NYT etc are "true journalism"
-
@raphjd said in Liberals three times more biased than conservatives when evaluating ideologically opposite individuals, study finds:
He's the most clueless person I've ever met. Everyone else knows things going on within their own profession.
I would say you are the most clueless person you've ever met if you expect and English Linguistics professor to know about such things. Doesn't come up much in discussion of syntax and semantics.
Like I've said, you and blabarg are the only two people I've ever talk to who are so well-versed in the subject of pedophilia.
-
We are well versed in your profession's push to promote child fucking because we are against it.
Prior to 25 years ago when your profession started pushing MAP, you losers pushed plain old child fucking. You didn't try to hide your agenda.
I still say you are a liar or the dumbest fucktard on the planet that you had no clue about what your profession has been doing all these years.
-
@raphjd said in Liberals three times more biased than conservatives when evaluating ideologically opposite individuals, study finds:
We are well versed in your profession's push to promote child fucking because we are against it.
Prior to 25 years ago when your profession started pushing MAP, you losers pushed plain old child fucking. You didn't try to hide your agenda.
I still say you are a liar or the dumbest fucktard on the planet that you had no clue about what your profession has been doing all these years.I'm just going to let that statement stand as is. Everything that you are is summed up there perfectly. Like I've said before, sometimes I am not sure if you are just playing Devil's advocate, or really are that thick. And so much for your "unbiased" BS. What a clown.
-
So, which is it?
Are you the most clueless fucktard on the planet or are you a blatant liar?
You can't be a 65yo professor and have absolutely no clue what kind of shit your fellow professors are pushing for the last 40+ years.
-
@raphjd I could debate you about the existence of a collective brain, but I see no point; you really are that thick. Not sure if I should feel more sorry for you or the people around you.
-
You still haven't answered if you are a total fucktard liar or a clueless twat.
40+ years and you claim you had no idea what your profession has been pushing. No one believes you.
-
@raphjd said in Liberals three times more biased than conservatives when evaluating ideologically opposite individuals, study finds:
No one believes you.
Speaking for the world now, are we? It might be a frontal lobe issue. I might recommend an EEG.
You can try to insult my intelligence as much as you like. Just remember that you profess that every academic in the world is aware of every field, opinion, theory, etc. out there. As I've told you repeatedly: sexual deviation is not a hobby of mine. I'm not well-versed on the topic.
