tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23042696453664133722024-03-13T12:34:26.492+11:00Eye on PsychHot issues on the wild frontiers of psychology and lifeScott McGrealhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13757633582829269183noreply@blogger.comBlogger53125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2304269645366413372.post-40089415750699281262019-10-02T13:04:00.000+10:002019-10-02T13:04:04.006+10:00Why do People Find the Fundamental Attribution Error so Confusing? <br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Social psychologists have developed names for a host of
biases in the ways people perceive behaviour. The fundamental attribution error
is not only one of the most famous of these biases, but apparently one of the
most frequently misunderstood. Many laypeople confuse the fundamental
attribution error with distinctly different phenomena, such as the self-serving
attribution bias. Such confusion is not limited to laypeople, however. A recent
article by a sociologist making a misguided attempt to apply a sociological/social
psychological analysis to the popular TV show <i>Game of Thrones </i>illustrates
the same confusion, and perhaps illustrates a deeper confusion among those who
would attempt to deny the importance of human individuality in the name of
social science. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I have previously written about the <span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">fundamental attribution error </span><span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">in a <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog/unique-everybody-else/201701/the-fundamental-attribution-error-is-overrated">pair</a>
of <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog/unique-everybody-else/201702/the-fundamental-errors-situationism">articles</a>
in which I argued that, despite the importance that some people claim for it,
it is actually highly overrated. Even though its name is well-known, a lot of
people seem to be confused about what this phenomenon is supposed to be,
perhaps because it is a counter-intuitive concept. Hence, I will start with
some definitions and distinctions. The fundamental attribution error was
defined by psychologist Lee Ross as a tendency for people, when making
attributions about the causes of behaviour "to underestimate the impact of
situational factors and to overestimate the role of dispositional factors in controlling
behaviour" (Reeder, 1982). In plainer language, this means that even when
someone has very little choice in how they behave because they were pressured
into doing something by external environmental demands (i.e., situational
factors controlled their behaviour), other people will tend to assume that they
behaved the way they did because of their own attributes, such as their
personality, attitudes, and desires (i.e., dispositional factors). This
phenomenon, which is supposed to be a ubiquitous and pervasive error, is said
to occur because laypeople have causal theories of behaviour in which they
believe that “situational factors have little impact on human behaviour” (Gawronski,
2004). That is, people supposedly underestimate the “power of the situation”
because they are “intuitive dispositionalists” who mistakenly think that people
act consistently with their personalities. Got all that?<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">At this point, some
readers may object that what I have described is <i>not</i> the fundamental
attribution error and that I don’t know what I am talking about. (Oh, ye of
little faith!) Instead, they might think that the fundamental attribution error
is something like the following:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="margin-left: 14.2pt;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">We also have a bias for
the individual as the locus of agency in interpreting our own everyday life and
the behavior of others. We tend to seek internal, psychological explanations
for the behavior of those around us while making situational excuses for our
own. This is such a common way of looking at the world that social
psychologists have a word for it: the <i>fundamental attribution error</i>.</span><span lang="EN-US" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">When someone wrongs us, we
tend to think they are evil, misguided or selfish: a personalized explanation.
But when we misbehave, we are better at recognizing the external pressures on
us that shape our actions: a situational understanding. If you snap at a
coworker, for example, you may rationalize your behavior by remembering that
you had difficulty sleeping last night and had financial struggles this month.
You’re not evil, just stressed! The coworker who snaps at you, however, is more
likely to be interpreted as a jerk, without going through the same kind of
rationalization. This is convenient for our peace of mind, and fits with our
domain of knowledge, too. We know what pressures us, but not necessarily others.</span></blockquote>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This is a quote from an article by sociologist, Zeynep
Tufekci, with the modest and unassuming title, “<a href="http://archive.is/7wH7F" target="_blank">TheReal Reason Fans Hate the Last Season of Game of Thrones</a>.” <span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">Like much else in her article, this explanation of
the supposed fundamental attribution error is horribly garbled and inaccurate,
and is part of an agenda to interpret this TV show through a situationist,
sociological lens to promote her own theories. What Tufekci describes is not
the fundamental attribution error at all but what social psychologists call the
<i>actor-observer asymmetry</i> (AKA <i>actor-observer bias</i>). There are two
main accounts of this latter phenomenon. In the strong or general account,
people routinely explain their own behaviour in situational terms and other
people’s behaviour in dispositional terms, regardless of whether the behaviour
is good or bad. Social psychologists have claimed that the general version of
the actor-observer asymmetry is a robust and pervasive effect. This is supposed
to occur because people have different perspectives depending on whether they
are actors (i.e. doing something) or observing another’s behaviour. That is,
when performing an action, people are supposed to be more aware of how their
environment affects their behaviour, whereas when they are observing an action,
they are more focused on the person doing the action than their environment (Malle,
2006). However, there is another more limited version of this phenomenon, in
which the way people judge their own vs. another’s behaviour depends on whether
the outcome was favourable or unfavourable. Specifically, actors attribute their
failures or negative behaviours to environmental, situational factors, and their
successes or positive behaviours to their own personal characteristics. On the
other hand, when observing others, they either do not show this bias or show
the opposite effect: attribute other people’s successes to the environment
(e.g., luck) and failures to their personal characteristics. This phenomenon is
also known as the <i>self-serving bias in attribution</i> (self-serving bias
for short). <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">Although the fundamental
attribution error and these two versions of the actor-observer asymmetry might
seem similar, there are nevertheless important conceptual differences between
them. First, advocates of the theory of <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog/unique-everybody-else/201609/the-ghost-situationism-and-why-personality-is-not-myth">situationism</a>,
like Lee Ross and <a href="https://www.edge.org/response-detail/27014">Richard
Nisbett</a>, have claimed that the fundamental attribution error occurs because
people believe that situational factors have little impact on human behaviour,
that is, that people simply do not understand the “power of the situation” because
they prefer to explain behaviour in dispositional terms. Furthermore, this is
supposed to be an <i>error</i> because situational factors are the central<i> </i>causes
of behaviour while dispositions or personality traits are of little importance.
On the other hand, the actor-observer asymmetry suggests that people do accept
that situational factors influence their behaviour, at least when considering
their own actions in the general account, or when it suits them in the
self-serving account. Furthermore, if the self-serving account is correct,
invoking situational causes is not necessarily a sign that one has grasped the
true causes of behaviour, but that one is attempting to look at things in
whatever way allows one to feel better about oneself. Hence, there seems to be
a contradiction between what these alleged phenomena imply. Hence, it may be
helpful to consider the current evidence for each of them. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">First, let’s get the
fundamental attribution error out of the way. I have criticised this at length
elsewhere (<a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog/unique-everybody-else/201701/the-fundamental-attribution-error-is-overrated">here</a>
and <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog/unique-everybody-else/201702/the-fundamental-errors-situationism">here</a>),
so I will deal with it briefly by summarising the conclusion of a review (Gawronski,
2004) that I did not have a chance to cover in my previous articles. According
to this review, although there is evidence that people do draw dispositional
inferences from situationally constrained behaviour (which the author refers to
as correspondence bias), there is no evidence that laypeople have causal
theories in which “situational factors have little impact on human behaviour.”
Hence, the author proclaimed that “the fundamental attribution error is dead.”
Instead, the author argues that it is not that people underestimate the
importance of situational causes in general, but that they sometimes
misunderstand <i>which specific</i> situational factors may be acting on a
person. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">What about the
actor-observer asymmetry? Regarding the general version of this phenomenon, the
author (Malle, 2006) of a review of more than 170 studies spanning 35 years
found that the mean effect size was indistinguishable from zero and concluded
that “The actor–observer hypothesis appears to be a widely held yet false
belief.” Additionally, he noted that “actors and observers do not notably
differ in their person and situation explanations” of behaviour. On the other
hand, the self-serving bias fared better, as there was evidence that this
effect replicated across studies. Specifically, the expected actor-observer
asymmetry occurred for negative events (i.e., people explained own failures
situationally and another’s failure dispositionally), whereas the reverse
occurred for positive events (i.e., people explained own successes dispositionally
and another’s success situationally). Hence, the actor-observer asymmetry is
not a general phenomenon, but does occur under certain circumstances, depending
on the evaluation of what is being explained. Additionally, this effect is a
fairly modest one, that is, one might say that people tend to engage in this
bias some of them time, but not consistently and constantly. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">Why the confusion?<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">Why do so many people
confuse the fundamental attribution error with the actor-observer asymmetry?
I’m not altogether sure, but I suspect it might be because the fundamental
attribution error is a counter-intuitive, even weird idea that does not match
people’s everyday experience, while the self-serving version of the
actor-observer asymmetry is easier to relate to. Specifically, even though some
social psychologists have claimed that most people are “intuitive
dispositionalists” who mistakenly believe that “situational factors have little
impact on human behaviour,” there is actual a lack of evidence that this is
even true; on the contrary, there is evidence that most people accept an
interactionist view, in which both situations and personality traits influence
behaviour (Newman & Bakina, 2009). By the way, the interactionist view was
endorsed by the eminent psychologists Kurt Lewin in 1938, and also happens to
be in line with the empirical evidence. On the other hand, the idea that people
tend to be self-serving and believe whatever happens to make them feel better
is more intuitive and easier to understand as it matches people’s common
experience. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEijD6qYwlnx6mLavcaM1vjvJe0hqFtxJaf6vyE8Nmfcev_Yo76XzUyfXLDUPl82T9bPcTyltlhpCQsEMqMrBt8oJxTCVR2gBaej3Fu8nFWAJwMSHqM_46eI5rNTttIxYeJpoIQLpRcrXTU/s1600/janus_coin.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="323" data-original-width="320" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEijD6qYwlnx6mLavcaM1vjvJe0hqFtxJaf6vyE8Nmfcev_Yo76XzUyfXLDUPl82T9bPcTyltlhpCQsEMqMrBt8oJxTCVR2gBaej3Fu8nFWAJwMSHqM_46eI5rNTttIxYeJpoIQLpRcrXTU/s320/janus_coin.png" width="317" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><div class="MsoNormal">
Situations, dispositions:
which face is more important?<o:p></o:p></div>
</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
One noted critic of the <span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">fundamental
attribution error (Funder, 2001) argued that the <i>really, really</i> <i>fundamental</i>
attribution error is committed by psychologists, and not by laypeople:
believing that the causes of behaviour are simple and easily dichotomized. More
specifically, proponents of situationism have tried to advance the fundamental
attribution error as a phenomenon that illustrates their dichotomous theories
that behaviour is really controlled by external situational factors vs.
internal dispositional ones. Returning to Zeynep Tufekci’s article, it seems
that she has tried to apply a similar dichotomous theory to pop culture in her <i>Game
of Thrones</i> article, in which she attempts to apply a situational vs.
dispositional analysis first to the TV show and then to society at large. This
irked me, because it seemed to reflect an attempt to deny the importance of
individuality in society, which has long been a theme of situationist discourse
in social psychology. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">Was Storytelling in
Game of Thrones, Sociological, Psychological, or a Mix of Both? <o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">Tufekci’s article makes
several claims that she thinks explain why season eight of the show was
unsatisfactory to many fans. She argues that the show switched from what she
calls <i>sociological</i> storytelling to <i>psychological </i>storytelling. As
she explains, the former involves “structural storytelling” in which
“characters evolve in response to the broader institutional settings,
incentives and norms that surround them.” Psychological<i> </i>storytelling, on
the other hand, which is apparently the norm for most TV shows, focuses on “overly
personal” stories about individuals and their distinctive personalities. She
seems to imply that this switch began with season eight because the show ran
ahead of the George R.R. Martin novels, which focused on sociological stories,
and the show’s producers did not understand how to continue doing sociological
story-telling and switched to the more familiar mode of psychological<i> </i>story-telling
instead. (Actually, the show had completely ran ahead of the books by the beginning
of season six, but Tufekci’s article does not acknowledge this)<i>.</i>
Apparently, “the psychological/internal genre leaves us unable to understand
and react to social change.” <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Tufekci argues that characters in sociological storytelling
still “have personal stories and agency,” but “are also greatly shaped by
institutions and events around them,” and act according to incentives that
“come noticeably from these external forces, too, and even strongly influence
their inner life.” However, despite her assertion that characters have their
own agency, she goes on to argue that a character’s choices are basically
driven by situational factors and implies that individuality is not that
important:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 14.2pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
“<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">The hallmark of sociological
storytelling is if it can encourage us to put ourselves in the place of <i><span style="border: none windowtext 1.0pt; mso-border-alt: none windowtext 0cm; padding: 0cm;">any </span></i>character, not just the main hero/heroine, and
imagine ourselves making similar choices. ‘Yeah, I can see myself doing that
under such circumstances’ is a way into a broader, deeper understanding.” <o:p></o:p></span></blockquote>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 14.2pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Note that she says <i>any </i>character, no matter how
depraved or shocking their behaviour, which seems to <span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">imply that people and characters are basically interchangeable. If it were
true that people make similar choices based only on circumstances, then this
would imply that a person’s values, desires, and inclinations, indeed their
personality, is of no real importance. Using some salient examples from the
show, if viewers can put themselves in the place of <i>any </i>character and
imagine themselves behaving the same way under the circumstances, this would
mean that, on the one hand, they could see themselves being treacherous and
opportunistic if they were in the place of someone like Petyr Baelish, yet also
imagine that they would be honourable to a fault, even if it meant their own
downfall, in the shoes of someone like Ned Stark. This does not make any sense.
The meaning of honour is that a person does <i>not</i> betray their friends
when it happens to suit their incentives. In fact, it means making hard
choices, even when it would be convenient to put personal interests first.
Arguing that viewers can imagine that they would act willy-nilly depending on
the whims of circumstances would mean that they lack a concept of having
personal values that guide a character’s behaviour. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">Tufekci particularly criticizes how the show handled the character arc of
Daenerys Targaryen, especially her murderous turn in episode 7. She argues that
this started out as a story of the corruption of power, and if it had been done
sociologically, it would have provided an interesting study of “a leader who
starts in opposition with the best of intentions, … and ends up acting brutally
and turning into a tyrant if they take power.” Her argument is that Dany’s
downfall was originally set up to illustrate how she became corrupted by
external forces provided her with ruinous incentives, “</span><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">and season by season, we have
witnessed her, however reluctantly, being shaped <a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_Hlk13427674">by the
tools that were available to her and that she embraced: war, dragons, fire.</a>”
Then, unfortunately, her storyline in season eight went from an interesting </span><span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">sociological one to being</span><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> ruined by this psychological
storytelling<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">[1]</span></span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span> that
the </span><span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">producers seem to favour. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">It’s not my intention to defend season eight or the handling of Daenerys’
storyline. (People could be arguing about this for years to come.) What I want
to point out instead is that the distinction that Tufekci makes between
sociological and psychological<i> </i>story-telling rests on a false dichotomy</span><span style="font-family: "pmingliu" , serif; mso-fareast-language: ZH-TW; mso-font-kerning: 0pt;"> </span><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: PMingLiU; mso-fareast-language: ZH-TW; mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">and that she </span>twists the facts to fit her
pet theory<span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">. Even a casual inspection of the plots
from the early seasons of the show illustrates that Dany was portrayed as having
striking psychological characteristics that foreshadowed exactly her later
descent into genocide and tyranny, quite apart from any external sociological
forces that may have shaped her decisions. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Consider an important scene from season two, episode 3 (<i>Garden
of Bones</i>). (See the relevant clip <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v48Ol0D-l4E">here</a>.) </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/v48Ol0D-l4E/0.jpg" frameborder="0" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/v48Ol0D-l4E?feature=player_embedded" width="320"></iframe></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Dany and her
retinue are at the gates of the city of Qarth seeking admission. She states
frankly, that her people have no food and water, and will all die if not
admitted. The person whom she needs to convince to let her in, requests to see
her dragons, as some of his colleagues doubt they even exist. Even though this
is a simple and reasonable request that she could easily accommodate, she
refuses and is denied admittance. She then makes the following remarkable statement,
that explicitly foreshadows what she will do in season eight: “When my dragons
are grown, we will take back what was stolen from me and destroy those who
wronged me! We will lay waste to armies and burn cities to the ground!” <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So, even though she is in a weak, vulnerable position, she
refuses to use the only bargaining chip she has, and instead makes threats that
she cannot yet carry out. Hence, even at this early stage, when she has quite
limited power and her dragons are only babies, she demonstrates grandiosity,
entitlement, and vindictiveness, even hints of madness. Is this an example of
sociological storytelling? What incentives exactly did Dany have to behave in
such an irrational and potentially suicidal manner? How many viewers think they
would act the same way under these circumstances? Despite <span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">Tufekci’s argument that Dany was gradually
corrupted by external forces and incentives, her own peculiar personality is
clearly an important factor in explaining her behaviour, as she acts in a way
that is clearly contrary to the “incentives” afforded by the situation. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">Tufekci’s argument about
the supposed distinction between sociological and psychological<i> </i>storytelling,
with the psychological<i> </i>mode<i> </i>being the dominant but misleading
one, while the sociological mode tells the real story, mirrors the distinction
made by situationists between situational and dispositional accounts of behaviour.
Both Tufekci’s argument and the situationist argument misrepresent their
subject matter and both present a lopsided view of things that tries to deny
the importance of human individuality. This is not to say that sociological
factors are not important in good storytelling or in real life. An alternative
to the view that sees personality dispositions and situational influences on behaviour
as opposing forces, is that a person’s circumstances can reveal what their
personality is really like. For example, facing danger provides a test of
whether one will be cowardly or courageous, treacherous or loyal, depending on
one’s individual strengths and weaknesses, virtues and vices. Similarly, when at
its best, <i>Game of Thrones </i>was able to tell stories in which interesting
characters faced trying circumstances that required them to make difficult choices,
and these choices revealed their true selves. Tufekci argued that being given
power corrupts even well-meaning leaders, but an alternative view is that power
provides a test of the strength of a person’s character, that is, whether one
has the capacity to act with moral integrity or whether one sees power as a
path to self-aggrandizement. This question of choice was actually raised in the
final episode of season eight in a scene in which Tyrion asks Jon Snow whether
he would have acted the same way as </span><span lang="EN-US" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">Daenerys if he had opportunity to do so. (See this
</span><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xruVRCtTD0s"><span lang="EN-US" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">clip</span></a><span lang="EN-US" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">.) </span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/xruVRCtTD0s/0.jpg" frameborder="0" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/xruVRCtTD0s?feature=player_embedded" width="320"></iframe></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-font-kerning: 0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">Tyrion </span><span lang="EN-US" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">reminds him that he has ridden on a dragon’s back,
that he had that power, and asks him if he would have burned a city down? This question
brings into focus the crucial importance of personal responsibility and choice.
Situationist accounts of behavior tend to downplay personal responsibility and
imply that people are controlled by external forces, which also seems to be
Tufekci’s argument. This is a disempowering view of human nature and one that
is based on discredited ideas, like the fundamental attribution error. </span><span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-font-kerning: 0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">Tufekci argues that sociological</span><span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;"> storytelling is important because “the dominance of the psychological and
hero/antihero narrative” may also be “the reason we are having such a difficult
time dealing with the current historic technology transition.” She </span><span lang="EN-US" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US;">goes on to talk about the need to
change the structures, incentives and forces that shape how people and their
companies behave, rather than trying to “dethrone antiheros and replace them
with good people.” This is all very well, but is worthwhile to remember that
structural changes to society are often brought about by individuals who have
the vision and the means to do so. For example, I noted in a previous </span><a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog/unique-everybody-else/201512/personality-profiles-great-american-presidents"><span lang="EN-US" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US;">post</span></a><span lang="EN-US" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-US;"> on American presidents that individual
personality traits were substantially related to a president’s effectiveness
while in office. I agree with her that it is important for society to build
good institutions and provide incentives for people to behave well. But let’s
not overlook the importance of individuals in shaping society. </span><span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="mso-font-kerning: 0pt;"><br /></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">This post
was previously published on Psychology Today in two parts: <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog/unique-everybody-else/201908/why-is-the-fundamental-attribution-error-so-confusing" title="Why Is the Fundamental Attribution Error So Confusing?">Part 1</a> and <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog/unique-everybody-else/201908/the-person-and-the-situation-in-game-thrones-and-society" title="The Person and the Situation in Game of Thrones and Society">Part 2</a>.</span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US"></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i>© Scott McGreal. Please do not reproduce without
permission. Brief excerpts may be quoted as long as a link to the original
article is provided.</i><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div style="mso-element: footnote-list;">
<hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" />
<!--[endif]-->
<br />
<div id="ftn1" style="mso-element: footnote;">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">[1]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span>
Tufekci also complains that the scriptwriters explain Daenerys’ destructive choices
in terms of “genetic determinism,” because the other characters note that
madness runs in Dany’s family, as if this is a radical departure from the
show’s previous sociological emphasis. On the contrary, from season 1, one of
the show’s recurring themes was that incest has negative consequences for the
children of such unions, which includes Daenerys and her family, with its long
history of inbreeding. Hence, so-called “genetic determinism,” or at least
recognition that heredity matters, has been an integral component of the
storylines, even when it was supposed to be a “sociological” show. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>References<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoBibliography">
Funder, D. C. (2001). The Really, Really Fundamental Attribution Error. <i>Psychological Inquiry</i>, <i>12</i>(1), 21–23. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoBibliography">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoBibliography">
Gawronski, B. (2004). Theory-based bias correction in dispositional inference: The fundamental attribution error is dead, long live the correspondence bias. <i>European Review of Social Psychology</i>, <i>15</i>(1), 183–217. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463280440000026<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoBibliography">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoBibliography">
Malle, B. F. (2006). The actor-observer asymmetry in attribution: A (surprising) meta-analysis. <i>Psychological Bulletin</i>, <i>132</i>(6), 895–919. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.6.895<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoBibliography">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoBibliography">
Newman, L. S., & Bakina, D. A. (2009). Do people resist social‐psychological perspectives on wrongdoing? Reactions to dispositional, situational, and interactionist explanations. <i>Social Influence</i>, <i>4</i>(4), 256–273. https://doi.org/10.1080/15534510802674292<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoBibliography">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoBibliography">
Reeder, G. D. (1982). Let’s give the fundamental attribution error another chance. <i>Journal of Personality and Social Psychology</i>, <i>43</i>(2), 341–344. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.43.2.341</div>
</div>
</div>
<br />Scott McGrealhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13757633582829269183noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2304269645366413372.post-61664130704991926462017-01-15T22:42:00.000+11:002017-01-15T22:42:59.717+11:00What Differential-K Theory gets Wrong about Race Differences in Sexuality<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In two <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201601/race-differences-in-androgens-do-they-mean-anything" title="Race Differences in Androgens: Do They Mean Anything?">previous</a> <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201602/androgens-dodgy-penis-size-data-and-differential-k-theory" title="Androgens, Dodgy Penis Size Data, and Differential-K Theory">posts</a>, I discussed a study (Dutton, van der Linden, & Lynn, 2016) that aimed to test predictions from the highly controversial differential-K theory. Among other things, this theory proposes that there are racial differences in sexual attitudes and behavior, so that people of sub-Saharan African descent are supposed to be the most sexually permissive, while people of East Asian descent are supposed to be the most sexually restrained, and Caucasian descended people are said to be in-between. The authors used data from a sex survey by Durex, the condom manufacturer, to provide evidence of racial differences in sexual behavior that they claimed supported their theory. This method has problems because the survey lacked data from African nations, and its methodology was not up to rigorous scientific standards. Fortunately, more rigorous scientific research is available using data from 48 countries, including several African ones, that can shed some light on this subject. As will become clear, the evidence from this research contradicts the predictions of differential-K theory in several major respects. Furthermore, cross-cultural differences in sexual attitudes and behavior are related to a variety of environmental, social and cultural factors that need to be taken into account before making sweeping generalisations about race. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh89ox5AtU3hnF3MQKKDYCWmsHwFP4QZwgrmi0ji9NC0lfrY2ynzu6oqR-iXa1MjDlSdRvIVtRq30GInQC2Tn2Ltq-TopCpG0ze5LRM5_U97Wf2mM_PZEkAP7M-UKafsNJ68DbgOki7UdI/s1600/800px-Venus_and_organist_and_little_dog.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh89ox5AtU3hnF3MQKKDYCWmsHwFP4QZwgrmi0ji9NC0lfrY2ynzu6oqR-iXa1MjDlSdRvIVtRq30GInQC2Tn2Ltq-TopCpG0ze5LRM5_U97Wf2mM_PZEkAP7M-UKafsNJ68DbgOki7UdI/s400/800px-Venus_and_organist_and_little_dog.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I have discussed differential-K theory before in some detail, so I will recap it only briefly here. According to this theory, over millennia, various racial groups have developed different reproductive strategies in order to adapt to differences in their local environments. Sub-Saharan African people developed a fast life history strategy entailing sexual permissiveness and high fertility. Caucasian and to an even greater extent Asian peoples developed slower life history strategies, characterised by greater sexual restraint, and more intensive parental investment in a smaller number of children. Dutton et al. (2016) proposed that these racial characteristics are related to differences in levels of androgens (male hormones including testosterone), with higher androgen levels being related to faster life history strategies. The evidence they presented did not wholly support this theory, as they actually found that African peoples were more similar to Asian ones in some respects. Dutton et al. argued that since sexual behavior is influenced by androgen levels, racial differences should be evident in this respect. Using data from the Durex sex survey, they found that survey respondents from Caucasian nations reported a higher annual frequency of sex and more lifetime sex partners than respondents from Asian nations. Unfortunately, the only African nation sampled in the survey was South Africa, so it was not possible to compare Africans with the other two groups. Nevertheless, Dutton et al. concluded that the results were broadly in line with the prediction of differential-K theory that Asians would be more sexually restrained than Caucasians.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Apart from the lack of African data, the survey has problems with lack of scientific rigour. It was conducted mainly as a promotional activity for Durex and it is not clear how representative the respondents are of the general population from which they were drawn. Furthermore, the survey made no attempt to account for important differences between the nations sampled that could influence sexual behavior, such as social and economic conditions. Hence, the survey provides a crude comparison between nations and it is unclear how much the results are due to biological factors related to the respondents’ race as Dutton et al. propose or to other salient factors. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
One prediction of differential-K theory is that populations with a predominantly fast life history strategy should have more interest in short-term mating, whereas those with a predominantly slow life history strategy should be more focused on long-term mating. One way to assess interest in short-term versus long-term mating is to look at sociosexuality. i.e. attitudes towards sex without commitment to a long-term relationship. People high in sociosexuality feel comfortable with uncommitted sex and are interested in having many sexual partners. Conversely, people low in sociosexuality are generally unwilling to have sex outside of a committed relationship and consequently desire fewer partners. If differential-K theory is correct, African nations should have the highest rates of sociosexuality, Asian ones should have the lowest, while Caucasian ones should be intermediate. There has been a study on national levels of sociosexuality (Schmitt, 2005) which includes enough nations from each of these three groups to allow the necessary comparisons. This study found that both African and Asian nations on the whole had significantly lower levels of sociosexuality compared to Caucasian nations from Europe, North America and Australia. This result contradicts differential-K theory and is also consistent with Dutton et al.’s other findings that people from African nations were more similar to those from Asian nations in some respects than they were to Caucasians.<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Looking more closely into Schmitt’s results reveals more findings that are inconsistent with differential-K theory. National sociosexuality was positively correlated with the level of human development, including life expectancy, and negatively correlated with infant mortality, teen pregnancy rate, prevalence of child malnutrition, prevalence of low birth weight, and fertility. According to life history theory, environments in which life expectancy is short and infant mortality is high should foster a fast life history strategy, involving early marriage and high levels of fertility. Differential-K theory predicts that fast life history strategies should be associated with sexual permissiveness, yet in countries with shorter life expectancy, high infant mortality and high fertility, people actually tend to be more sexually restrained compared to people in more developed countries with better life expectancy and so on. Schmitt’s results are more consistent with an alternative theory, known as strategic pluralism, that low sociosexuality and a preference for monogamy are more adaptive in harsh, difficult environments because infants have better chances of survival when bi-parental care is more prevalent. Conversely, in resource-rich environments, such as in developed nations, single-parenting becomes more viable and higher sociosexuality becomes more common. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Another environmental factor associated with sociosexuality is imbalanced sex-ratio (Barber, 2008). For example, in societies where there are more men than women available for marriage, levels of sociosexuality tend to be lower. In this situation, marriageable women are highly in demand, and they can demand a higher level of relationship exclusivity from prospective partners, and are more likely to delay intercourse until after marriage. Conversely, when there are fewer men than women available for marriage, levels of sociosexuality tend to be higher. In this situation, women must compete more intensively for mates; consequently, sex outside of marriage and more permissive sexual attitudes are more common. Imbalanced sex ratios featuring more men than women occur today in a number of East Asian countries and this might help explain why these countries tend to be more sexually conservative (Schmitt & Project members, 2003). Additionally, societies where it is common for women to delay marriage in order to pursue a career also tend to be more sexually permissive. This might help explain why higher levels of economic development in a country are associated with higher levels of sociosexuality (Barber, 2008). <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
International differences in sociosexuality might also be related to changes in societal values as countries become more developed. Improvements in economic development are not only marked by increased life expectancy and reduced infant mortality, but by changes in societal values. Poorer countries tend to be marked by survival values, which emphasise tradition and obedience to authority. Economically developed societies tend to shift away from survival values towards self-expression values emphasising individual freedom. (I have discussed national values in more detail in a previous post.) An emphasis on personal freedom may also bring about greater sexual permissiveness. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgJnxA3fHdHjC7PtSYBnxexbAoHnfKgrryWZUH80tioKinNLLvB4vUMQE54t9XXHqoMPp6zRW5bB8UCpJg-zEmbDDnIXQszUqlgys7-Oze68q_AfP6wf0Cq8PJ1D6DDiBuAZ1Y3wS7gCys/s1600/truth+coming+out+of+her+well+to+shame+mankind.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgJnxA3fHdHjC7PtSYBnxexbAoHnfKgrryWZUH80tioKinNLLvB4vUMQE54t9XXHqoMPp6zRW5bB8UCpJg-zEmbDDnIXQszUqlgys7-Oze68q_AfP6wf0Cq8PJ1D6DDiBuAZ1Y3wS7gCys/s400/truth+coming+out+of+her+well+to+shame+mankind.jpg" width="308" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Truth will come out in the end. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b>Conclusion</b><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Differential-K theory makes predictions about racial differences in sexual attitudes that are contradicted by research evidence. Differential-K theory assumes that a fast life history strategy should be associated with greater sexual permissiveness, but this does not appear to be the case. Harsh environments that foster a fast life history strategy due to shorter life expectancy and higher infant mortality are more likely to be associated with sexual restraint and monogamy. Conversely, sexual permissiveness may become less risky in resource-rich environments conducive to a slow life history strategy. Furthermore, differential-K theory is based on the premise that cultural differences in sexual attitudes and behavior are based on inherent differences between racial groups. Specifically, Dutton et al. propose that racial differences in androgen levels are responsible for these variations. However, there is considerable evidence that sexual attitudes and behavior may be linked to social and environmental factors that may be distinct from biological racial differences.<br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<em><span style="background: white; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">Please consider following me on </span></em><a href="https://www.facebook.com/UniqueLikeEverybodyElse" target="_blank"><strong><span style="background: white; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt; text-decoration: none;">Facebook,</span></strong></a><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"> </span></span><a href="https://plus.google.com/b/116570783533948602312/116570783533948602312/posts" target="_blank"><strong><span style="background: white; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt; text-decoration: none;">Google Plus</span></strong></a><em><span style="background: white; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">, or </span></em><a href="https://twitter.com/ScottAMcGreal" target="_blank"><strong><span style="background: white; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt; text-decoration: none;">Twitter</span></strong></a><em><span style="background: white; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">.<b><o:p></o:p></b></span></em></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<em><span style="background: white; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"><br />
</span></em></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt;">© Scott McGreal. Please do not reproduce without permission. Brief excerpts may be quoted as long as a link to the original article is provided. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt;"><br />
</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt;">This article also appears on Psychology Today on my blog <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201603/race-sexual-permissiveness-and-questionable-science" target="_blank">Unique - Like Everybody Else</a>.</span><br />
<b><br />
</b> <b>Image credits</b><br />
<i>Venus and an Organist and a Little Dog</i>, 1550 by Titian.<br />
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><em>Truth rising out of her well to <a class="inline-links topic-link" href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/basics/embarrassment" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-bottom: 1px dashed rgb(153, 153, 153); color: black; padding-bottom: 2px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s; word-wrap: break-word;" title="Psychology Today looks at shame">shame</a> mankind, </em>by Jean-Léon Gérôme, 1896. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0cm 36pt;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><br />
</b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>References</b></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
<span lang="DE"><span style="text-align: center; text-indent: 0px;">Barber, N. (2008). Cross-National Variation in the Motivation for Uncommitted Sex: The Role of Disease and Social Risks. </span><i style="text-align: center; text-indent: 0px;"><span lang="DE">Evolutionary Psychology, 6</span></i><span lang="DE" style="text-align: center; text-indent: 0px;">(2).</span></span><br />
<span class="Z3988" title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.jtitle=Personality+and+Individual+Differences&rft_id=info%3A%2F&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fresearchblogging.org&rft.atitle=Population+differences+in+androgen+levels%3A+A+test+of+the+Differential+K+theory&rft.issn=&rft.date=2016&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=289&rft.epage=295&rft.artnum=&rft.au=Dutton%2C+E.&rft.au=van+der+Linden%2C+D.&rft.au=Lynn%2C+R.&rfe_dat=bpr3.included=1;bpr3.tags=Anthropology%2CPsychology%2CPersonality%2C+Intelligence%2C+Evolutionary+Anthropology%2C+Evolutionary+Psychology">Dutton, E., van der Linden, D., & Lynn, R. (2016). Population differences in androgen levels: A test of the Differential K theory <span style="font-style: italic;">Personality and Individual Differences</span>, 289-295</span><br />
<span style="text-indent: -36pt;">Schmitt, D. P. (2005). Sociosexuality from Argentina to Zimbabwe: a 48-nation study of sex, culture, and strategies of human mating. </span><i style="text-indent: -36pt;">Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 28</i><span style="text-indent: -36pt;">, 247-311.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-left: 36.0pt; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
Schmitt, D. P., & <span lang="EN-US">118 Members of the International Sexuality Description Project</span>. (2003). Universal Sex Differences in the Desire for Sexual Variety: Tests From 52 Nations, 6 Continents, and 13 Islands. <i>Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 85</i>(1), 85-104.<br />
<br />
<span style="text-indent: 0px;"><span style="float: left; padding: 5px;"><a href="http://www.researchblogging.org/"><img alt="ResearchBlogging.org" src="http://www.researchblogging.org/public/citation_icons/rb2_large_gray.png" style="border: 0;" /></a></span></span></div>
Scott McGrealhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13757633582829269183noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2304269645366413372.post-10094163652977393262017-01-15T22:00:00.000+11:002017-01-15T22:41:02.251+11:00Population Differences in Androgens Fail to Validate Richard Lynn's Claims about Racial Differences in Penis Size<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In the first <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201601/race-differences-in-androgens-do-they-mean-anything" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">part </span></a>of this post, I discussed a recent study (Dutton, van der Linden, & Lynn, 2016) that
attempted to empirically test the predictions of differential-K theory. To
recap briefly, this theory proposes that racial groups differ in their
preferred reproductive strategies and that as a result they differ in a wide
range of physical and psychological characteristics including intelligence,
personality, sexual behavior and attitudes, and even <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/the-pseudoscience-race-differences-in-penis-size" title="The Pseudoscience of Race Differences in Penis Size"><span style="color: blue;">penis length</span></a>. These
differences are thought to derive from group differences in androgens (male
hormones such as testosterone). According to the theory, African populations
should have the highest androgen levels, followed by Caucasians, then Asians. The study tested
five presumed markers of androgens: CAG repeats on the AR gene; amount of androgenic
body hair, specifically, mid-phalangeal hair (i.e. on the middle digit of the
fingers); national prostate cancer incidence; and two measures of sexual
behavior, specifically, number of partners, and annual frequency of sex. The
results found were not entirely in accord with the theory’s predictions, as
Africans were not significantly higher than Caucasians in CAG repeats on the AR
gene, and were lower than Caucasians in androgenic body hair and prostate
cancer incidence. The authors were not able to compare Africans with the other
groups on sexual behavior, as they had no African data. They did find that
Caucasians were higher than Asians in all androgen markers, which they took in
support of their theory. In this post, I will discuss how the authors of the
study interpreted their anomalous results, then respond to Dutton’s <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3c4TxciNeJZdmJ1MkwyNW1KNFk/view" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">claims</span> </a>that
his results support the validity of Lynn’s penis data and explain why his
results actually contradict this.<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Dutton et al. acknowledged that the results for androgenic
hair and prostate cancer do not support their hypothesis, and offered some
tentative explanations. In relation to prostate cancer, they suggest that
differences in general diet might be a factor, as people in Western countries
consume more dairy products and these have been linked to prostate cancer.
Additionally, people in Western countries tend to be more obese, another risk
factor for cancer. They point out that African American men have a 30% higher
rate of prostate cancer Caucasians even after taking into account obesity,
while Asian Americans have lower rates than these two groups. They also cite a
1986 study that found that African American men have 15% levels of freely
circulating testosterone than Caucasian Americans and that this might
contribute to their higher prostate cancer rates. They acknowledge that
differential access to medical care in the US might affect these results and
that African American men might not be fully representative of current
Sub-Saharan Africans. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Prostate cancer incidence and its relationship with
testosterone is a complex subject that I am not able to review fully. However,
I would like to briefly point out some research evidence that I am aware of
that may be of interest. Environmental factors including conflict with the law
can influence testosterone levels. Studies that take into account conflict with
the law comparing African American and Caucasian American men have found that
these groups had similar testosterone levels (Zitzmann
& Nieschlag, 2001). This same paper stated that higher levels of
prostate cancer in African Americans do not appear to be due to differences in
testosterone levels. Additionally, although Dutton et al. report a substantial
non-significant correlation between AR CAG length and prostate cancer incidence
across nations, prior research has found little evidence for an association
between CAG length and risk of prostate cancer at an individual level (Lange et al., 2008). Although prostate cancer
may well be a marker of androgen levels, the causes of variations between
ethnic groups in incidence rates are complicated by local environmental
factors, which makes it difficult to interpret these ethnic differences. This
raises doubts about the usefulness of treating national prostate cancer
incidence as a marker of reproductive strategies. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Moving on to androgenic hair, Dutton et al. offer a highly
speculative explanation of why Caucasian men have higher rates of body hair
than other populations. This was actually my favorite part of the paper as I
found it wryly amusing. They state: <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; mso-layout-grid-align: none; text-autospace: none;">
The anomaly that Caucasians
have the highest levels of androgenic hair and Africans the lowest can only be
speculated upon. It has been found that Caucasians, in contrast to the other
two populations, retain a small percentage (2–4%) of Neanderthal genes. It has
been argued that this may be one of the reasons why Caucasians are unexpectedly
hairy (e.g. Sankararaman, et al., 2014).<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; mso-layout-grid-align: none; text-autospace: none;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Note the reference cited in the last statement. There is a
slight problem with this explanation, specifically, that the facts stated are completely
wrong. Here is what Sankararaman, et al. (2014)
actually had to say on the subject:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 36.0pt;">
… <span style="background: white;">the
proportion of the genome with confidently inferred Neanderthal ancestry has a
mean of 1.38% in east-Asian and 1.15% in European populations consistent with
previous reports of <i>more Neanderthal ancestry in east-Asian than in European
populations...</i></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><i> </i><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 36.0pt;">
<span style="background: white;">We
do not detect tissue-specific expression patterns; however genes involved in
keratin filament formation and some other biological pathways are significantly
enriched in Neanderthal ancestry in European populations, east-Asian
populations, or both. Thus, Neanderthal alleles that affect skin and hair may
have helped modern humans to adapt to non-African environments.<span class="apple-converted-space"> [<i>Emphasis added.</i>]</span></span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 36.0pt;">
<span style="background: white;"><span class="apple-converted-space"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Well, so much for that theory about Caucasians being hairy
cavemen. It is not clear at all how the data for androgenic hair are supposed
to fit in with differential-K theory. <o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjh5QnDsiQcW8Kq3OrH5zok0vgxafPKZVx8W3ILRGLNbV7xJ18aRpGglXchGKzlyxfRfp3siDE59emfrJGo37UIGRuIibr1bRm5y5VuJp1TErDQtNiXd97JtRZmuzAyoxs58cW9_Mw1dwI/s1600/neander+meme.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjh5QnDsiQcW8Kq3OrH5zok0vgxafPKZVx8W3ILRGLNbV7xJ18aRpGglXchGKzlyxfRfp3siDE59emfrJGo37UIGRuIibr1bRm5y5VuJp1TErDQtNiXd97JtRZmuzAyoxs58cW9_Mw1dwI/s1600/neander+meme.jpg" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Dutton et al. argued that the pattern of correlations
between the androgen indicators provides evidence of their validity. In his
<a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3c4TxciNeJZdmJ1MkwyNW1KNFk/view" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">conference paper</a>, Dutton also stated that these androgen indicators are
correlated with the penis length data used in Lynn's (2013) paper. He claims that this supports the
trustworthiness of Lynn’s data. Dutton’s argument might possibly have some merit if
certain assumptions were met. In principle, two variables that are closely
related to each other should be correlated and this is known as convergent
validity. Hence, a strong correlation between two variables is often taken as
evidence of convergent validity. However, correlational analyses are based on
the assumption that two variables have a linear relationship (i.e. the data
points should form a roughly straight line pattern). When variables have a
non-linear relationship, use of correlations may give a misleading account of
how they are related. As I will show, Dutton’s data has some problems with
non-linearity that affects its convergent validity. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Furthermore, Dutton groups national data into three racial categories
which are supposed to form a distinct hierarchy of African > Caucasian >
Asian. Hence, in order to argue that the data on androgen markers provides convergent
evidence of the trustworthiness of Lynn’s data, both sets of data should follow
the same hierarchical pattern. However, they clearly do not. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Dutton et al. report an impressively large correlation
between androgenic hair and prostate cancer. However, an inspection of the
scatterplot provided (reproduced below) shows that the relationship between the
two variables appears decidedly non-linear. Among Caucasian countries there is
not much variance in the percentage of androgenic hair yet there is much more
variance in prostate cancer incidence. This means that among these countries
there is basically no correlation between the two variables. Among the African
and Asian nations, prostate cancer incidence has a more restricted range, but
there is somewhat more variance in the percentage of androgenic hair. So again,
there is basically no correlation between the two variables among these
countries either. Essentially, Caucasian countries have higher rates of both
androgenic hair and prostate cancer compared to the other countries, but this
does not mean that there is a linear correlation between these two variables,
even though they are both supposed to be markers of androgens. This suggests
that whatever underlies differences in national rates of prostate cancer is not
related in a simple linear way to whatever underlies national differences in androgenic
hair. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_JbCnjP75qXy8GzP0HeWICIvdvx7XQBtAfxYZdriB8N_wXcEXuKYjzpKUJcak8hLx9Ty14ZzmqW8VhFKUz_jy06-eJ7b0isl0s6ea_ocJyAY3W2LPaTr9x98FmFS5uPn7kXMOa_amD2E/s1600/androgen+graph+1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="277" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_JbCnjP75qXy8GzP0HeWICIvdvx7XQBtAfxYZdriB8N_wXcEXuKYjzpKUJcak8hLx9Ty14ZzmqW8VhFKUz_jy06-eJ7b0isl0s6ea_ocJyAY3W2LPaTr9x98FmFS5uPn7kXMOa_amD2E/s400/androgen+graph+1.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>Click to enlarge</i></div>
</div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
According to Lynn’s paper, data he derived from the <a href="http://www.everyoneweb.com/WORLDPENISSIZE" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">worldpenis site</a> indicated that men from African nations had the longest penises,
followed by Caucasians, followed by Asians. Lynn argued that this was in accord
with the predictions of differential-K theory. In my <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/the-pseudoscience-race-differences-in-penis-size" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">rebuttal</span></a>, I argued that because
the data on this site was compiled by an anonymous source and it is not clear
how it was derived or how valid it is, I could not see why a serious scholar
would rely on such a source of information or draw any conclusions from it. In
his paper, Lynn himself admits that the site is not a peer-reviewed source, so
I can only wonder why he used it in the first place rather than drawing on
primary research papers published in reputable journals. In his conference
<a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3c4TxciNeJZdmJ1MkwyNW1KNFk/view" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">presentation</span></a>, Dutton states (see slide 5) that <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/the-pseudoscience-race-differences-in-penis-size" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">I pointed out</span></a> ‘minor mistakes’ on the website
in order to ‘ridicule’ Lynn. Perhaps, he and I have different opinions about
what makes a mistake ‘minor’. Without going into all my original criticisms
here, among these ‘minor’ mistakes I noted that some of the research papers the
website cites as sources do not even exist.<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;">[1]</span></span></span><!--[endif]--></span> Hence, I find it natural
to wonder what else on this site has been simply made up. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Additionally, some of
the penis sizes stated for particular countries do not match the numbers
provided in the genuine papers cited as data sources.<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;">[2]</span></span></span><!--[endif]--></span> For some other countries
it is not clear what sources there even are. Personally, I think these issues
are cause for serious concern, but perhaps I am overstating how serious they
are? Dutton stated that the data from his study on androgen markers correlates
with the penis length data, indicating that the latter can be trusted. The
argument here seems to be that penis length should be correlated with other
androgen markers, and that if the penis length data can be statistically
predicted from the androgen data then the former is probably valid, or at least
in the right general direction. Dutton did find moderate statistical
correlations between androgen markers and Lynn’s penis data, therefore, he
argues, Lynn’s data passes muster. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
However, there is a problem with this argument. As explained
earlier, Lynn’s results and two of Dutton et al.’s results (prostate cancer
incidence and androgenic hair) are incompatible. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
For penis length, Lynn found: African > Caucasian >
Asian.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
For androgenic hair, Dutton et al. found: Caucasian >
Asian > African. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
For prostate cancer incidence, Dutton et al. found:
Caucasian > Asian = African.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I do not see how the pattern for the latter two results can
be used to validate the first one. More specifically, if prostate cancer and
androgenic hair accurately predicted penis length, then we would expect African
men and Asian men to both have smaller penises than Caucasian men, contrary to
what Lynn claimed. (Please note, I am not asserting anything at all about actual
differences in penis length between races, because I do not have sufficient
data. I am commenting on the methodology used to support such claims.) To put
this another way, although Lynn’s penis data is correlated with the other two
variables, the actual relationship between the former and the latter is
non-linear, so the correlations do not allow valid predictions. <o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgl0UyOmAAoxbHROWExkYQ2OcsI2RM9zOsJJ9yfHmqXbp6od8hLk7_mLzcQWf_ToH6Wga0mjUCV0TTNU2HBz21mDm1Nctcir8FRucA0E1RqHaFmX8QCTG2D6XPbthGe094qN4AODNUny-E/s1600/404goya.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgl0UyOmAAoxbHROWExkYQ2OcsI2RM9zOsJJ9yfHmqXbp6od8hLk7_mLzcQWf_ToH6Wga0mjUCV0TTNU2HBz21mDm1Nctcir8FRucA0E1RqHaFmX8QCTG2D6XPbthGe094qN4AODNUny-E/s400/404goya.jpg" width="276" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Scientists should use reliable data sources lest they get caught up in flights of fancy or end up groping in the dark like jackasses. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It might be helpful to illustrate this with a chart showing the relationship between national prostate cancer rates and the penis data. Dutton
does not provide relevant scatterplots, so I created one in Excel using
prostate cancer data from Haas, Delongchamps, Brawley, Wang, & de la Roza (2008) and 2011 penis length data from the
website Lynn used. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiX3cnR61jhnmAb2_8vqPq0OpmUBbt9A7JHVNH0BX19ndm9wOww2BkFFlodrXnVVRdbiZqHaQ9roz8DUGzzmQ3SeLVAO0eKC4Hxn8qWH2PLCm05HZraz2Wcu2d8S9Fc2GDPLGu6Mm9itJg/s1600/androgens+graph+2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="220" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiX3cnR61jhnmAb2_8vqPq0OpmUBbt9A7JHVNH0BX19ndm9wOww2BkFFlodrXnVVRdbiZqHaQ9roz8DUGzzmQ3SeLVAO0eKC4Hxn8qWH2PLCm05HZraz2Wcu2d8S9Fc2GDPLGu6Mm9itJg/s400/androgens+graph+2.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There is a linear correlation of r = .34 between prostate cancer incidence and penis length. This is not statistically significant due to the low sample size (only 21 countries), but Dutton has argued that correlations of this value are ‘substantial’ (slide 7). Does this mean that prostate cancer incidence can predict average national penis length? If there was a clear linear relationship between the two it might, albeit crudely. But look at the scatterplot above. The Asian countries cluster on the lower left, the Caucasian in the middle, and the African on the lower right. The relationship between the two variables is clearly non-linear. This is because the countries with the highest incidence of prostate cancer are Caucasian, yet these countries are mostly intermediate in penis length. A similar result would appear if one were to graph the relationship between androgenic hair and penis length, as Caucasians also had the highest rates of the former. At the risk of belabouring the obvious, it simply does not make any sense to say that because Lynn’s penis length data is correlated with these other variables that this means that the former can be trusted. Dutton’s and Lynn’s measures do not follow the same patterns so correlations between them can be explained as statistical artifacts of using linear tests on non-linear data. If scholars really want to know if there are differences between these groups in penis length, the sensible thing to do would be to find better data sources rather than trying to validate an anonymous database using crude predictions based on loosely related variables.<br />
<b><br /></b>
<b>Conclusion</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Differential-K is a grand theory that aims to explain a very
wide range of human population differences. However, it appears to be out of
step with the available data in some respects. One prediction of this theory is
that racial groups should differ from each other in consistent ways on a number
of factors that are supposed to be markers of androgen levels. Yet, an
empirical test of this prediction was not able to confirm the expected racial
hierarchy. The relationship between things that are supposed to be indicators
of androgen levels, such as androgenic hair and prostate cancer might be too
complex to be represented in a simple linear way. Furthermore, how these things
are supposed to be related to reproductive strategies is not entirely clear. Dutton
et al. found differences in sexual behavior between Caucasian and Asian
populations, but provided no data on Africans. The data source they used, an
internet survey by Durex, is not a peer-reviewed source and may be of
questionable validity. There are more scientific sources of information that could
shed light on cross-national differences in sexual behavior, and I make
some relevant observations about these in a follow-up <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201603/race-sexual-permissiveness-and-questionable-science" title="Race, Sexual Permissiveness, and Questionable Science">post</a>. Richard Lynn (2013)
argued that racial differences in penis length provide evidence of corresponding
racial differences in sexual restraint, although critics consider this view to
be naïve. Although Edward Dutton argued that his research results support the validity of Lynn’s earlier claims about racial differences in
penis size, a closer examination of his own data contradicts this.
Differential-K theory has not fared well and may be an overly simplistic theory
that attempts to explain too much with too little.<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<em><span style="background: white; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">Please consider following me on </span></em><a href="https://www.facebook.com/UniqueLikeEverybodyElse" target="_blank"><strong><span style="background: white; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt; text-decoration: none;">Facebook,</span></strong></a><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"> </span></span><a href="https://plus.google.com/b/116570783533948602312/116570783533948602312/posts" target="_blank"><strong><span style="background: white; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt; text-decoration: none;">Google
Plus</span></strong></a><em><span style="background: white; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">, or </span></em><a href="https://twitter.com/ScottAMcGreal" target="_blank"><strong><span style="background: white; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt; text-decoration: none;">Twitter</span></strong></a><em><span style="background: white; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">.<b><o:p></o:p></b></span></em></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<em><span style="background: white; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"><br /></span></em></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt;">© Scott McGreal. Please do not reproduce without
permission. Brief excerpts may be quoted as long as a link to the original
article is provided. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt;">This
article also appears on Psychology Today on my blog <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201602/androgens-dodgy-penis-size-data-and-differential-k-theory" target="_blank">Unique - Like </a></span><span style="background-color: white; color: blue; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"><a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201602/androgens-dodgy-penis-size-data-and-differential-k-theory" target="_blank">Everybody Else</a>.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span lang="DE"><br /></span></b>
<br />
<hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" />
<br />
<div id="ftn1">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; line-height: 17.12px;"><b>Footnotes</b></span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; line-height: 17.12px;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;">[1]</span></span></span></span> Since writing my original article, the penis website has added measurement data from various countries to the sidebar. Most of these cite genuine research, but there is one on ‘Ecuadorian measurement data,’ that cites a paper called ‘Study of penile dimensions in healthy Ecuadorian men of multiple ethnicities’ supposedly published in <i>Andrologia</i>. Included is a professional looking Abstract along with a pair of impressive looking graphs. However, <i>Andrologia </i>has never published anything by this name, and the paper appears not to exist. The whole citation looks like an elaborate hoax. What does this say about the scholarly value of this website?<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn2">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; line-height: 17.12px;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;">[2]</span></span></span></span> See the blog <a href="https://ethnicmuse.wordpress.com/tag/human-penis-size/">Ethnic Muse</a> for more detailed information.<br />
<br />
<b><span lang="DE">References</span></b></div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
<span class="Z3988" title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.jtitle=Personality+and+Individual+Differences&rft_id=info%3A%2F&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fresearchblogging.org&rft.atitle=Population+differences+in+androgen+levels%3A+A+test+of+the+Differential+K+theory&rft.issn=&rft.date=2016&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=289&rft.epage=295&rft.artnum=&rft.au=Dutton%2C+E.&rft.au=van+der+Linden%2C+D.&rft.au=Lynn%2C+R.&rfe_dat=bpr3.included=1;bpr3.tags=Anthropology%2CPsychology%2CPersonality%2C+Intelligence%2C+Evolutionary+Anthropology%2C+Evolutionary+Psychology">Dutton, E., van der Linden, D., & Lynn, R. (2016). Population differences in androgen levels: A test of the Differential K theory <span style="font-style: italic;">Personality and Individual Differences</span>, 289-295</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
Haas, G. P., Delongchamps, N.,
Brawley, O. W., Wang, C. Y., & de la Roza, G. (2008). The Worldwide Epidemiology
of Prostate Cancer: Perspectives from Autopsy Studies. <i>The Canadian journal of urology, 15</i>(1), 3866-3871. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
Lange, E. M., Sarma, A. V., Ray,
A., Wang, Y., Ho, L. A., Anderson, S. A., . . . Cooney, K. A. (2008). The
androgen receptor CAG and GGN repeat polymorphisms and prostate cancer
susceptibility in African-American men: results from the Flint Men's Health
Study. <i>J Hum Genet, 53</i>(3), 220-226. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
Lynn, R. (2013). Rushton’s r–K
life history theory of race differences in penis length and circumference
examined in 113 populations. <i>Personality
and Individual Differences, 55</i>(3), 261-266. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.02.016<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-left: 36.0pt; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
<span lang="DE">Sankararaman, S., Mallick, S., Dannemann, M., Prufer, K.,
Kelso, J., Paabo, S., . . . </span>Reich, D.
(2014). The genomic landscape of Neanderthal ancestry in present-day humans. <span lang="DE">[Letter]. <i>Nature, 507</i>(7492),
354-357. doi: 10.1038/nature12961<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
<span lang="DE" style="text-indent: -36pt;">Zitzmann, M., & Nieschlag, E. (2001). </span><span style="text-indent: -36pt;">Testosterone levels in healthy men and the relation to
behavioural and physical characteristics: facts and constructs. </span><i style="text-indent: -36pt;">European Journal of Endocrinology, 144</i><span style="text-indent: -36pt;">(3),
183-197. doi: 10.1530/eje.0.1440183</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-left: 36.0pt; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<br /></div>
<span style="float: left; padding: 5px;"><a href="http://www.researchblogging.org/"><img alt="ResearchBlogging.org" src="http://www.researchblogging.org/public/citation_icons/rb2_large_gray.png" style="border: 0;" /></a></span><br />
<div>
<br /></div>
Scott McGrealhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13757633582829269183noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2304269645366413372.post-70747827441600510202016-12-31T22:55:00.001+11:002017-01-15T22:38:50.501+11:00Population Differences in Androgens Fail to Support Differential-K Theory<div class="MsoNormal">
According to a controversial theory, Differential-<i>K</i>, major human populations differ in a systematic way along a continuum of psychological and physical characteristics, based on their preferred reproductive strategies. These presumed characteristics include intelligence, personality, sexual behavior and attitudes, and even, according to Richard Lynn, penis length. (I discuss this last topic in detail <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/the-pseudoscience-race-differences-in-penis-size" title="The Pseudoscience of Race Differences in Penis Size">here</a>.)<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhWOs5sTWHV2MVrzw0aIqWsGK1WIBqRd0ix9NzuscVag4t3BuorMul45NZXwyUzLcGgz4EJ6EYDT3efq1R5PN9aXs17ajYh36YyqbHIYHh3YEWMTiKzHnGUjwaHAGPQyA7Oh0mxZz5FYTw/s1600/800px-The_Intervention_of_the_Sabine_Women.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="285" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhWOs5sTWHV2MVrzw0aIqWsGK1WIBqRd0ix9NzuscVag4t3BuorMul45NZXwyUzLcGgz4EJ6EYDT3efq1R5PN9aXs17ajYh36YyqbHIYHh3YEWMTiKzHnGUjwaHAGPQyA7Oh0mxZz5FYTw/s400/800px-The_Intervention_of_the_Sabine_Women.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Discussion of racial differences can become heated, but hopefully cooler heads will prevail. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Differential-K is a very bold theory, sweeping in scope, developed by J.P. Rushton that aims to connect a wide range of apparently unrelated human variables in a single theoretical framework (Meisenberg & Woodley, 2013). According to this theory, variations in the generally preferred reproductive strategy of particular human groups have affected the during the course of their evolution. A fast life history strategy involves high mating effort and the production of a larger number of children with less intensive investment in each one. This kind of strategy is suited to conditions in which life expectancy is fairly short and infant mortality is high, and so people must aim to reproduce fairly quickly and frequently to ensure they pass on their genes to the next generation. In contrast, a slow life history strategy involves less mating effort and more parenting effort, with the production of fewer children and more intensive investment in each one. Differential-K theory assumes that fast and slow strategies are each associated with a whole suite of human characteristics that differ not only among individuals but between whole populations. Specifically, East Asian peoples are assumed to have the slowest strategy, while sub-Saharan African peoples have the fastest strategy, and Caucasian peoples are in-between, although closer to Asians than Africans. Naturally this theory has been the focus of intensely heated controversy due to its assumptions about racial differences. Supporters of this theory argue that it has the virtue of being parsimonious, as it purports to explain a wide range of disparate phenomena with a single principle (Meisenberg & Woodley, 2013). Critics have argued that it is makes arbitrary assumptions about what characteristics are supposed to be associated with fast and slow strategies respectively in order to create a hierarchy of humanness, and that Rushton and colleagues have used cherry-picked and distorted selections of evidence in support of this theory (Weizmann, Wiener, Wiesenthal, & Ziegler, 1990). Due to the breadth and complexity of the topic, I will not attempt anything like a comprehensive review here. Instead I will focus on a recent paper (Dutton, van der Linden, & Lynn, 2016) that attempts to test if racial differences in androgen levels follow a pattern predicted by differential-K theory.<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
According to Richard Lynn, life history strategy might be regulated by androgens (i.e. masculine hormones like testosterone) such that higher androgen levels are associated with a faster life history strategy. Higher androgen levels are associated with greater aggression and competitiveness, as well as with increased short-term mating. Populations with a slower life history strategy have historically had a greater need for cooperation among males due to the harsher environments in which they lived and this led to reduced androgen levels. Hence, Lynn proposed racial differences in androgen levels, with sub-Saharan Africans having the highest levels, followed by Caucasians, followed by East Asians. This theory implies that high androgen populations should have higher levels of interest in short-term sexual relationships (a marker of mating effort) while lower androgen populations should be more sexually restrained. Dutton, et al. (2016) aimed to test this theory by examining data on androgen indicators in a range of representative countries. The lead author of this paper, Edward Dutton, has also provided information about this research in a conference presentation that can be viewed <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3c4TxciNeJZdmJ1MkwyNW1KNFk/view">here</a>. I was personally interested to note that Dutton mentions my name in this presentation in regard to an <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/the-pseudoscience-race-differences-in-penis-size" target="_blank">article </a>I wrote a few years ago critiquing a paper by Richard Lynn (2013) in which the latter used data from an anonymous website as evidence for race differences in penis length (see slide 5). According to Dutton, I 'ridiculed' this paper because of ‘minor mistakes’ on the website that I argued invalidated Lynn’s claims. Dutton goes on to assert that the results of his research demonstrate that ‘Lynn’s penis data can indeed be trusted.’ I still stand behind my original criticisms and respond to Dutton’s comments in the <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201602/androgens-dodgy-penis-size-data-and-differential-k-theory" title="Androgens, Dodgy Penis Size Data, and Differential-K Theory">follow up</a> to this article. In the meantime, I will see if I can keep the ridicule to a minimum, or at least stay within the bounds of civil discussion. <br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
To test their theory, Dutton et al. identified five androgen-level indicators for which national-level data was available. One of these was CAG repeats on the AR. According to a review (Minkov & Bond, 2015), more CAG repeats are associated with androgen insensitivity, while fewer repeats are linked to more sexual partners and violent and impulsive behavior.<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;">[1]</span></span></span><!--[endif]--></span> The other indicators were: amount of body hair, specifically, hair on the middle digit of the fingers (mid-phalangeal hair); national prostate cancer incidence; and two measures of sexual behavior, specifically, number of partners, and annual frequency of sex. Data on sexual behavior derived from a 2005 internet survey by Durex, the condom manufacturer. Unfortunately, because the Durex survey included only one African country<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;">[2]</span></span></span><!--[endif]--></span>, it was only possible to make comparisons between Caucasians and Asians. I would like to point out that this survey is not scientific and is not peer-reviewed, so the quality of its methodology is unclear. Internet surveys are not necessarily representative of the population they are derived from<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;">[3]</span></span></span><!--[endif]--></span>, so the results may not be valid indicators of rates of sexual behavior in the respective countries. Racial categories were decided based on the main group within each country. For Dutton et al.'s purposes, Northeast Asian (e.g. China) and Southeast Asian (e.g. Malaysia) countries were classified as East Asian (or just Asian for brevity), while European, North African and several South-Asian (e.g. India) countries were classified as Caucasian. Sub-Saharan African countries were classified as such, and simply referred to as African for brevity. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I will briefly summarise the results and then provide some comments. The five androgen indicators were correlated in the expected directions with each other, and 7 out of 10 of the correlations were significant. The authors argue that these inter-correlations support their hypothesis that these are actually manifestations of androgen levels. Although not mentioned in the published paper, Dutton’s conference presentation notes that the five androgen indicators were correlated with the penis length data used by Lynn. He asserts that because all these measures are correlated with each other that this ‘demonstrates that Lynn’s penis data can indeed be trusted’ (slide 7). <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
To show the outcomes for the group comparisons I have adapted the authors’ results into the table below.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Group Comparison of the Androgen Indicators <o:p></o:p></div>
<table border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="MsoTableGrid" style="border-collapse: collapse; border: none; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-padding-alt: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-yfti-tbllook: 1184;"><tbody>
<tr style="height: 30.0pt; mso-yfti-firstrow: yes; mso-yfti-irow: 0;"> <td nowrap="" style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-top: solid windowtext 1.0pt; height: 30.0pt; mso-border-bottom-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 94.5pt;" valign="top" width="126"></td> <td colspan="2" style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-top: solid windowtext 1.0pt; height: 30.0pt; mso-border-bottom-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 99.0pt;" valign="top" width="132"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
East Asians<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td colspan="2" nowrap="" style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-top: solid windowtext 1.0pt; height: 30.0pt; mso-border-bottom-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 93.3pt;" valign="top" width="124"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Caucasians<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td colspan="2" nowrap="" style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-top: solid windowtext 1.0pt; height: 30.0pt; mso-border-bottom-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 103.5pt;" valign="top" width="138"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Sub-Saharan Africans<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> </tr>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-irow: 1;"> <td nowrap="" style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border: none; height: 15.0pt; mso-border-bottom-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 94.5pt;" valign="top" width="126"></td> <td nowrap="" style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border: none; height: 15.0pt; mso-border-bottom-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 45.0pt;" valign="top" width="60"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
M<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border: none; height: 15.0pt; mso-border-bottom-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 54.0pt;" valign="top" width="72"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
(+SD)<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border: none; height: 15.0pt; mso-border-bottom-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 43.8pt;" valign="top" width="58"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
M<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border: none; height: 15.0pt; mso-border-bottom-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 49.5pt;" valign="top" width="66"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
(+SD)<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border: none; height: 15.0pt; mso-border-bottom-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 49.5pt;" valign="top" width="66"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
M<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border: none; height: 15.0pt; mso-border-bottom-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 54.0pt;" valign="top" width="72"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
(+SD)<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> </tr>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-irow: 2;"> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 94.5pt;" valign="top" width="126"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
AR CAG length<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 45.0pt;" valign="top" width="60"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
23.1<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 54.0pt;" valign="top" width="72"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
0.35<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 43.8pt;" valign="top" width="58"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
21.31<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 49.5pt;" valign="top" width="66"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
1.28<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 49.5pt;" valign="top" width="66"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
20.2<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 54.0pt;" valign="top" width="72"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
0.93<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> </tr>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-irow: 3;"> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 94.5pt;" valign="top" width="126"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<i>N countries<o:p></o:p></i></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 45.0pt;" valign="top" width="60"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
8<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 54.0pt;" valign="top" width="72"></td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 43.8pt;" valign="top" width="58"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
24<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 49.5pt;" valign="top" width="66"></td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 49.5pt;" valign="top" width="66"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
4<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 54.0pt;" valign="top" width="72"></td> </tr>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-irow: 4;"> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 94.5pt;" valign="top" width="126"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Androgenic hair<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 45.0pt;" valign="top" width="60"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
38.71<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 54.0pt;" valign="top" width="72"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
5.72<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 43.8pt;" valign="top" width="58"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
62.49<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 49.5pt;" valign="top" width="66"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
10.04<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 49.5pt;" valign="top" width="66"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
13.63<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 54.0pt;" valign="top" width="72"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
7.69<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> </tr>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-irow: 5;"> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 94.5pt;" valign="top" width="126"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<i>N countries<o:p></o:p></i></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 45.0pt;" valign="top" width="60"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
14<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 54.0pt;" valign="top" width="72"></td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 43.8pt;" valign="top" width="58"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
71<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 49.5pt;" valign="top" width="66"></td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 49.5pt;" valign="top" width="66"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
22<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 54.0pt;" valign="top" width="72"></td> </tr>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-irow: 6;"> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 94.5pt;" valign="top" width="126"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Prostate cancer<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 45.0pt;" valign="top" width="60"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
5.4<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 54.0pt;" valign="top" width="72"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
4.9<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 43.8pt;" valign="top" width="58"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
64.4<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 49.5pt;" valign="top" width="66"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
19.36<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 49.5pt;" valign="top" width="66"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
16.88<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 54.0pt;" valign="top" width="72"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
10.41<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> </tr>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-irow: 7;"> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 94.5pt;" valign="top" width="126"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<i>N countries<o:p></o:p></i></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 45.0pt;" valign="top" width="60"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
4<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 54.0pt;" valign="top" width="72"></td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 43.8pt;" valign="top" width="58"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
10<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 49.5pt;" valign="top" width="66"></td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 49.5pt;" valign="top" width="66"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
12<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 54.0pt;" valign="top" width="72"></td> </tr>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-irow: 8;"> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 94.5pt;" valign="top" width="126"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Sex frequency<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 45.0pt;" valign="top" width="60"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
80.75<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 54.0pt;" valign="top" width="72"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
16.67<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 43.8pt;" valign="top" width="58"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
107.18<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 49.5pt;" valign="top" width="66"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
11.95<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 49.5pt;" valign="top" width="66"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
NA<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 54.0pt;" valign="top" width="72"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
23.22<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> </tr>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-irow: 9;"> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 94.5pt;" valign="top" width="126"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<i>N countries<o:p></o:p></i></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 45.0pt;" valign="top" width="60"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
8<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 54.0pt;" valign="top" width="72"></td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 43.8pt;" valign="top" width="58"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
22<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 49.5pt;" valign="top" width="66"></td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 49.5pt;" valign="top" width="66"></td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 54.0pt;" valign="top" width="72"></td> </tr>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-irow: 10;"> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 94.5pt;" valign="top" width="126"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Sex partners<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 45.0pt;" valign="top" width="60"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
6.48<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 54.0pt;" valign="top" width="72"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
2.83<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 43.8pt;" valign="top" width="58"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
9.21<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 49.5pt;" valign="top" width="66"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
2.81<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 49.5pt;" valign="top" width="66"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
NA<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border: none; height: 15.0pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 54.0pt;" valign="top" width="72"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
5.53<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> </tr>
<tr style="height: 15.0pt; mso-yfti-irow: 11; mso-yfti-lastrow: yes;"> <td nowrap="" style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border: none; height: 15.0pt; mso-border-bottom-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 94.5pt;" valign="top" width="126"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<i>N countries<o:p></o:p></i></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border: none; height: 15.0pt; mso-border-bottom-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 45.0pt;" valign="top" width="60"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
8<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border: none; height: 15.0pt; mso-border-bottom-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 54.0pt;" valign="top" width="72"></td> <td nowrap="" style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border: none; height: 15.0pt; mso-border-bottom-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 43.8pt;" valign="top" width="58"><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
22<o:p></o:p></div>
</td> <td nowrap="" style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border: none; height: 15.0pt; mso-border-bottom-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 49.5pt;" valign="top" width="66"></td> <td nowrap="" style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border: none; height: 15.0pt; mso-border-bottom-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 49.5pt;" valign="top" width="66"></td> <td nowrap="" style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border: none; height: 15.0pt; mso-border-bottom-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; width: 54.0pt;" valign="top" width="72"></td> </tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In line with the authors’ expectations, statistical tests showed that East Asian populations had lower androgen markers than Caucasians on all five indicators. However, the remaining results were not in line with differential-K theory because African populations did not have significantly higher androgen markers than Caucasian ones on any measure. For AR CAG length, the difference between Caucasians and Africans was in the expected direction but was not statistically significant, although both groups had greater CAG lengths than Asians. Africans had significantly lower rates of prostate cancer than Caucasians (and did not significantly differ from Asians) and the lowest percentage of androgenic hair. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
To recap, differential-K theory predicts that African populations should have the highest levels of androgens, followed by Caucasians, followed by Asians, and that Caucasians should be closer to Asians than Africans. Of the three comparisons that included Africans, only the results for AR CAG repeats come close to this pattern, although the difference between Africans and Caucasians was not significant, and Caucasians were actually slightly closer to Africans than to Asians. To be fair the non-significance of this result might be attributable to the small number (only four) of African nations in the analysis. A number of previous studies have actually found that people of African descent on average did have shorter CAG repeats than other peoples (Ackerman et al., 2012; Esteban et al., 2005; Kittles et al., 2001; Lange et al., 2008). However, whether this actually indicates anything about the life history strategy of different populations remains questionable. The two other androgen indicators for which African data was available follow a completely different pattern. For androgenic hair, Caucasians have the highest rate, followed by Asians, then Africans. For prostate cancer, Caucasians have the highest rate, followed by Asians and Africans, who do not significantly differ. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
According to differential-K theory, Africans and Asians are supposed to be at opposite ends of the life history strategy continuum. However, if androgens are a marker of life history strategy, then based on two of the indicators Africans and Asians would appear to be at the slow end of the continuum and Caucasians at the fast end. This is very difficult to reconcile with differential-K theory. Dutton et al. provide no African data on sexual behavior, so they cannot say whether Africans are less restrained than Caucasians as predicted by their theory. However, they found that Africans were more similar to Asians than Caucasians on two of the androgen indicators. According to the logic used by Dutton et al., if sexual behavior is correlated with androgen levels, then it would be reasonable to expect Africans to be more like Asians in respect to sexual behavior as well. However, such a result would also be contrary to the predictions of their theory. On the other hand, the data source Dutton et al. used for sexual behavior is not a scientific one, so it might not even be valid anyway. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In my <span style="line-height: 107%;"><a href="https://my.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201602/androgens-dodgy-penis-size-data-and-differential-k-theory" title="Androgens, Dodgy Penis Size Data, and Differential-K Theory"><span style="color: blue;">follow-up post</span></a></span>, I discuss how Dutton et al. interpret their anomalous results, then respond to Dutton’s claims that his results support the validity of Lynn’s penis data and explain why his own results actually contradict this. My <span style="color: blue;"><a href="https://www.blogger.com/" title="Race, Sexual Permissiveness, and Questionable Science">third post</a> </span>in this series address the issue of differences in sexual attitudes across major human populations, and shows that these do not fit the predictions of Differential-K theory.<br />
<br />
<span style="float: left; padding: 5px;"><a href="http://www.researchblogging.org/"><img alt="ResearchBlogging.org" src="http://www.researchblogging.org/public/citation_icons/rb2_large_gray.png" style="border: 0;" /></a></span><br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<em><span style="background: white; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">Please consider following me on </span></em><a href="https://www.facebook.com/UniqueLikeEverybodyElse" target="_blank"><strong><span style="background: white; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt; text-decoration: none;">Facebook,</span></strong></a><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"> </span></span><a href="https://plus.google.com/b/116570783533948602312/116570783533948602312/posts" target="_blank"><strong><span style="background: white; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt; text-decoration: none;">Google Plus</span></strong></a><em><span style="background: white; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">, or </span></em><a href="https://twitter.com/ScottAMcGreal" target="_blank"><strong><span style="background: white; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt; text-decoration: none;">Twitter</span></strong></a><em><span style="background: white; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">.<b><o:p></o:p></b></span></em></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<em><span style="background: white; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"><br />
</span></em></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt;">© Scott McGreal. Please do not reproduce without permission. Brief excerpts may be quoted as long as a link to the original article is provided. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt;"><br />
</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt;">This article also appears on Psychology Today on my blog <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201601/race-differences-in-androgens-do-they-mean-anything" target="_blank">Unique - Like Everybody Else</a>.</span><span style="color: red;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>References <o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
Ackerman, C. M., Lowe, L. P., Lee, H., Hayes, M. G., Dyer, A. R., Metzger, B. E., . . . The Hapo Study Cooperative Research, G. (2012). Ethnic Variation in Allele Distribution of the Androgen Receptor (AR) (CAG)n Repeat. <i>Journal of Andrology, 33</i>(2), 210-215. doi: 10.2164/jandrol.111.013391<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
Aluja, A., García, L. F., Blanch, A., & Fibla, J. (2011). Association of androgen receptor gene, CAG and GGN repeat length polymorphism and impulsive-disinhibited personality traits in inmates: the role of short-long haplotype. <i>Psychiatric Genetics, 21</i>(5), 229-239. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
Cheng, D., Hong, C.-J., Liao, D.-L., & Tsai, S.-J. (2006). Association study of androgen receptor CAG repeat polymorphism and male violent criminal activity. <i>Psychoneuroendocrinology, 31</i>(4), 548-552. doi: 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2005.11.004<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
Comings, D. E., Muhleman, D., Johnson, J. P., & MacMurray, J. P. (2002). Parent–Daughter Transmission of the Androgen Receptor Gene as an Explanation of the Effect of Father Absence on Age of Menarche. <i>Child Development, 73</i>(4), 1046-1051. doi: 10.1111/1467-8624.00456<o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
<span class="Z3988" title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.jtitle=Personality+and+Individual+Differences&rft_id=info%3A%2F&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fresearchblogging.org&rft.atitle=Population+differences+in+androgen+levels%3A+A+test+of+the+Differential+K+theory&rft.issn=&rft.date=2016&rft.volume=90&rft.issue=&rft.spage=289&rft.epage=295&rft.artnum=&rft.au=Dutton%2C+E.&rft.au=van+der+Linden%2C+D.&rft.au=Lynn%2C+R.&rfe_dat=bpr3.included=1;bpr3.tags=Anthropology%2CPsychology%2CPersonality%2C+Intelligence%2C+Population+Genetics%2C+Evolutionary+Psychology%2C+Evolutionary+Anthropology">Dutton, E., van der Linden, D., & Lynn, R. (2016). Population differences in androgen levels: A test of the Differential K theory <span style="font-style: italic;">Personality and Individual Differences, 90</span>, 289-295</span><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
Esteban, E., Rodon, N., Via, M., Gonzalez-Perez, E., Santamaria, J., Dugoujon, J.-M., . . . Moral, P. (2005). Androgen receptor CAG and GGC polymorphisms in Mediterraneans: repeat dynamics and population relationships. <i>J Hum Genet, 51</i>(2), 129-136. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
Kittles, R., Young, D., Weinrich, S., Hudson, J., Argyropoulos, G., Ukoli, F., . . . Dunston, G. (2001). Extent of linkage disequilibrium between the androgen receptor gene CAG and GGC repeats in human populations: implications for prostate cancer risk. <i>Human Genetics, 109</i>(3), 253-261. doi: 10.1007/s004390100576<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
Lange, E. M., Sarma, A. V., Ray, A., Wang, Y., Ho, L. A., Anderson, S. A., . . . Cooney, K. A. (2008). The androgen receptor CAG and GGN repeat polymorphisms and prostate cancer susceptibility in African-American men: results from the Flint Men's Health Study. <i>J Hum Genet, 53</i>(3), 220-226. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
Lynn, R. (2013). Rushton’s r–K life history theory of race differences in penis length and circumference examined in 113 populations. <i>Personality and Individual Differences, 55</i>(3), 261-266. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.02.016<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
Meisenberg, G., & Woodley, M. A. (2013). Global behavioral variation: A test of differential-K. <i>Personality and Individual Differences, 55</i>(3), 273-278. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.04.016<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
Minkov, M., & Bond, M. H. (2015). Genetic polymorphisms predict national differences in life history strategy and time orientation. <i>Personality and Individual Differences, 76</i>, 204-215. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.12.014<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
Rajender, S., Pandu, G., Sharma, J. D., Gandhi, K. P. C., Singh, L., & Thangaraj, K. (2008). Reduced CAG repeats length in androgen receptor gene is associated with violent criminal behavior. <i><span lang="DE">International Journal of Legal Medicine, 122</span></i><span lang="DE">(5), 367-372. doi: 10.1007/s00414-008-0225-7</span><span lang="DE"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-left: 36.0pt; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
<span lang="DE">Weizmann, F., Wiener, N. I., Wiesenthal, D. L., & Ziegler, M. (1990). </span>Differential K theory and racial hierarchies. <i>Canadian Psychology, 31</i>(1), 1-13. doi: 10.1037/h0078934<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div>
<!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><br clear="all" />
<hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" />
<!--[endif]--> <br />
<div id="ftn1">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><b>Footnotes</b></span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;">[1]</span></span></span><!--[endif]--></span> Actually, the evidence reviewed by Minkov and Bond is somewhat equivocal. One of the two studies comparing violent offenders with a community sample, found no difference between the two groups in CAG repeat length (Cheng, Hong, Liao, & Tsai, 2006) while the other one did (Rajender et al., 2008). A study looking at impulsive personality traits (Aluja, García, Blanch, & Fibla, 2011) found that although an inmate sample was higher on a range of impulsive personality traits compared to a community control group, the two groups did not differ in CAG repeat lengths. A study (Comings, Muhleman, Johnson, & MacMurray, 2002) cited by Minkov and Bond as evidence linking CAG repeats to lifetime number of sexual partners did not actually assess CAG repeats at all, but a separate structure of the AR gene called the GGC polymorphism. Additionally, the study sample consisted of men being treated for substance abuse and did not have a healthy control group. <o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn2">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<span style="font-size: xx-small;"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; line-height: 107%;">[2]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span> </span>South Africa<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn3">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;">[3]</span></span></span><!--[endif]--></span> For example, countries differ in their levels of internet access, which can affect who responds to the survey. Additionally, people who choose to respond to internet surveys, especially ones about sex, and in particular one that is hosted on the website of a condom manufacturer, may not be typical of people in the general population. The Durex website does not provide any information addressing these issues. (Thanks to Petra Boynton for highlighting these concerns.)<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
</div>
Scott McGrealhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13757633582829269183noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2304269645366413372.post-2112952806158388702015-06-28T17:33:00.000+10:002015-06-28T22:36:10.211+10:00What personality features do heroes and psychopaths have in common? <div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="float: left; padding: 5px;"><a href="http://www.researchblogging.org/"><img alt="ResearchBlogging.org" src="http://www.researchblogging.org/public/citation_icons/rb2_large_gray.png" style="border: 0;" /></a></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
A recent research paper attempts to answer the question: “Are psychopaths and heroes twigs off the same branch?” Psychopathy is usually thought of as one of the most malevolent manifestations of a disturbed personality structure as it is associated with selfishness, callousness, and lack of concern for others. In spite of this, in recent times people have begun to look for a positive face to psychopathy, or
at the very least, to some of its component traits. The evidence for
this is rather mixed, but there does seem to be a connection of sorts between
at least some traits and behavior loosely associated with psychopathy and
heroic actions that help others. Bold, fearless traits are associated with
heroic behavior, but callous traits such as meanness and coldness are not. More
puzzling is that people with a history of antisocial behavior are more likely
to engage in heroic acts to help others.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEixJ8OjXnyuccBpdcQ4-QKqZcNd518UAFQBni62BFMuvKRXzyt5Cc12V0wF7eJQGoFnscVzkEWwnR7_r_jftBcYpwpQb7KLdkfNKFFOZl-HfQNjq9F3KhyphenhyphenYwMmzY1Dl1kkA2mdziacMWsE/s1600/Batman_%2528retouched%2529.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEixJ8OjXnyuccBpdcQ4-QKqZcNd518UAFQBni62BFMuvKRXzyt5Cc12V0wF7eJQGoFnscVzkEWwnR7_r_jftBcYpwpQb7KLdkfNKFFOZl-HfQNjq9F3KhyphenhyphenYwMmzY1Dl1kkA2mdziacMWsE/s400/Batman_%2528retouched%2529.jpg" width="220" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Some heroes have a distinctly dark side</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Psychopathy is composed of a
cluster of several different component traits that interact with each other to
produce a disturbing whole. According to the triarchic model, psychopathy
comprises a combination of three main traits: boldness, meanness, and
disinhibition (Patrick, Fowles, & Krueger,
2009). Boldness involves the capacity to remain calm in threatening
situations, and is associated with being socially self-assured and assertive.
Disinhibition refers to problems with impulse control and a tendency to act
without thinking about the consequences. Meanness involves aggressively seeking
to have one’s own way, and is associated with callousness, and lack of remorse
or empathy. Individuals can express each of these traits to varying degrees,
and so there may be different subtypes of psychopathy emphasising particular
combinations of these traits. For example, some people described as
psychopathic might show extreme meanness but not be especially disinhibited,
and vice versa. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Although psychopathy is generally considered maladaptive,
there has been some speculation that there might be subtypes of psychopathy
that might allow a person to be successful in society. It has even been
suggested that some psychopathic traits might even have socially desirable
consequences in some circumstances. For example, according to one theory, one
of the developmental precursors of psychopathy is a fearless temperament.
Children with a fearless temperament are difficult to socialise effectively
because they do not respond well to punishment, hence they may have little
concern with the negative consequences of disregarding society’s rules.
However, people with a fearless temperament may also be very brave in the face
of danger, and given the right circumstances, might be more ready than others
to perform heroic acts involving personal risk for the benefit of others.
Hence, some have speculated that “psychopaths and heroes are twigs from the
same branch” (Smith, Lilienfeld, Coffey, &
Dabbs, 2013). Fearlessness is thought to underlie both boldness and
meanness, and it has been argued that boldness is a relatively pure form of
fearlessness, whereas meanness may result from a failure of proper
socialization in fearless children (Patrick, et
al., 2009). <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEimU7ufjk1wXx9AxNucm-XH8UOq0OeA-ukOERqihfub19LjRydvfly0eCRyVgm1C3ACVy160wRHEyB70Zw2ViWMuRwpsvnpevIsAFTvVmUc2t_Ni5TvV8L1PchwX8tFbtOy1nMqD65hxfg/s1600/280px-Bond_-_Sean_Connery_-_Profile.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEimU7ufjk1wXx9AxNucm-XH8UOq0OeA-ukOERqihfub19LjRydvfly0eCRyVgm1C3ACVy160wRHEyB70Zw2ViWMuRwpsvnpevIsAFTvVmUc2t_Ni5TvV8L1PchwX8tFbtOy1nMqD65hxfg/s320/280px-Bond_-_Sean_Connery_-_Profile.jpg" width="274" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Fictional hero James Bond serves his country loyally, yet has the markings of a classic psychopath</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
A 2013 study examined whether psychopathic traits were related to a propensity to perform heroic acts, defined as altruistic behavior that involves some degree of risk to the actor (Smith, et al., 2013). In particular, the researchers wanted to test whether a trait referred to as ‘fearless dominance’,
which they argue represents a form of ‘successful psychopathy’ and
which is closely related to boldness, would be more closely related to heroic
behavior than other psychopathic traits related to disinhibition and meanness.
In a series of three surveys,<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%; mso-ansi-language: EN-AU; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">[1]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span>
the authors correlated a number of measures of psychopathic and antisocial
traits with measures assessing the extent to which a person had performed
actions involving risk (either physical or social) to help another person, and
how often they had helped strangers (which the authors argued usually involves
risk). The results were somewhat inconsistent, but overall they found that
traits related to fearless dominance and boldness, such as social potency
(self-assurance in dealing with other people) and fearlessness had modest
positive correlations with heroic actions. Disinhibition-related traits showed
mixed results, with some traits such as ‘impulsive non-conformity’ showing
modest positive correlations, and other traits such as ‘carefree
nonplanfulness’ showing modest negative correlations with heroic actions.
Traits related to meanness, such as ‘coldheartedness’, showed small to moderate
negative correlations with heroism. Perhaps surprisingly, measures of
antisocial behavior and delinquency generally showed moderate positive
correlations with heroism measures, and some of these correlations were among
the largest in all three surveys. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The authors concluded that their study provided some
preliminary support for a connection between psychopathic-related traits,
particularly those related to boldness, and heroism. These findings seem rather
puzzling, especially the relationship between antisocial behavior and heroism.
One possible explanation is that people with bold fearless traits are prone to
involve themselves in potentially dangerous situations, which might involve
antisocial behavior on some occasions, and altruistic behavior on others.
However, other research (Miller & Lynam,
2012) has found that the trait of fearless dominance measured by Smith
et al. is only weakly related to antisocial behavior. Hence, it seems unlikely that fearless dominance is the underlying shared factor explaining the
correlations between antisocial behavior and heroism. Disinhibition traits are
more strongly related to antisocial behavior, but in the Smith et al. study
these had very inconsistent and rather weak correlations with heroism. Some
disinhibition traits, such as a tendency to act impulsively in emergency
situations, might be particularly relevant to heroism. However, other
disinhibition traits, such as having an erratic lifestyle in which one does not
plan for the future may be decidedly unheroic. Note that Smith et al. found
that ‘impulsive non-conformity’ had a positive correlation, while ‘carefree
nonplanfulness’ had a negative correlation with heroism. However, even the
correlations between impulsive non-conformity tended to be noticeably smaller
than the correlations between antisocial behavior and heroism. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
What sort of antisocial behavior exactly is most correlated
with heroic behavior is not specified by the Smith et al. study and this might
be important. Aggressive antisocial behavior in general can be either proactive
(e.g. premeditated actions that harm others for personal gain) or reactive
(e.g. retaliation in response to provocation). Prior research has found that
proactive aggression is more strongly related to meanness (e.g. callous
unemotional traits) than is reactive aggression. People who engage in heroic
behavior to help others might be more likely to have a history of reactive
rather than proactive aggression, since they do not seem to be particularly
mean. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Another possible issue is that measures used in the Smith et
al. study assessed lifetime occurrences of both antisocial and heroic behavior.
It is possible that people who perform heroic actions might go through a
developmental phase involving some antisocial behavior which they later mature
out of. Hence, they might be of a different type than people who persist in
antisocial activities throughout much of their adult lives. The latter pattern
of chronic antisocial behavior seems more characteristic of the prototypical
psychopath who does not seem to learn from his or her mistakes. The reason I
suggest this is because of a recent study which seems to suggest that people
who had received an award for exceptional bravery, risking their own lives to
save others, seemed to have achieved a more mature level of personal
development compared to ordinary community members (Dunlop & Walker, 2013). In this study, participants were
assessed on interpersonal traits and personal strivings. Additionally, they
were interviewed about their life story and were asked to describe critical
incidents occurring at particular phases of their lives. Their responses were
then analysed for the presence of key themes. Compared to a community control group, bravery award recipients were higher in
interpersonal dominance, showed greater strivings for personal growth and
identity development, and had a more sophisticated level of social awareness
and understanding. Additionally, their life story interviews were characterised
by more frequent themes of agency, redemption, and early advantage. Agency
refers to a sense of personal effectiveness. Redemption themes involve life
stories in which an initially bad event or circumstance leads to something
demonstrably good or emotionally positive. Early advantage refers to quality of
attachments, childhood sensitivity to the needs of others, and the frequency of
helpers relative to enemies. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
What this personality profile suggests to me is that brave
heroes in this study were interpersonally bold, felt effective in their lives,
and probably felt emotionally secure during their upbringing. Additionally,
they appear to have experienced instances of personal adversity which later led
to positive changes in their lives. They seem to have a capacity to reflect on
and learn from their life experiences, even adverse ones. Unfortunately, the
study did not assess to what extent they had ever engaged in antisocial
behavior. I am inclined to speculate that linkages between antisocial behavior
and heroic actions might particularly be found in these types of mature
individuals who are interpersonally bold and who have developed a positive life
story characterised by themes of agency and redemption. Hence, they might have
been involved in antisocial behavior at an early stage in their life, learned
from their mistakes, and then moved on to more mature socially responsible forms
of bravery. Future research studies could investigate how accurate these
speculations are through more detailed assessments of the life history of
people who have engaged in heroic behavior compared to less brave individuals. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In summary, there may well be a loose connection between
heroes and psychopaths in that they may share some tendencies but not others.
In order to be a hero, it probably helps to be fearless and perhaps even a
little reckless and impulsive. Perhaps a history of getting into trouble
contributes in some way to the development of heroism in the right people.
However, unlike hard-core psychopaths, people who become heroes are not as
mean, callous or cold. Additionally, it is possible that people who become
heroes may have a more mature level of personality development that allows them
to contribute positively to society, something that hard-core psychopaths
appear to be lacking. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p><br /></o:p></div>
<hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; line-height: 14.2666664123535px;"><b>Footnote </b></span></span></span></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14.2666664123535px;">[1]</span></span></span> Their paper also includes an analysis of personality traits of American Presidents but to keep things simpler I will not consider that here. </o:p><br />
<br />
<b>Related blog posts </b><br />
The following pair of articles challenge Zimbardo's contention that heroism and evil are equally "banal".<br />
<a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201404/are-heroes-and-villains-really-just-victims-circumstance" target="_blank">Are Heroes and Villains just Victims of Circumstance?</a> <br />
<a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201405/heroes-and-villains-the-contradictions-within-situationism" target="_blank">Heroes and Villains: the Contradictions within Situationism</a><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p><br /></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<em><span style="background: white; font-family: Arial, sans-serif;">Please consider following me on </span></em><a href="https://www.facebook.com/UniqueLikeEverybodyElse" target="_blank"><strong><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; text-decoration: none;">Facebook,</span></strong></a><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; font-family: Arial, sans-serif;"> </span></span><a href="https://plus.google.com/b/116570783533948602312/116570783533948602312/posts" target="_blank"><strong><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; text-decoration: none;">Google
Plus</span></strong></a><em><span style="background: white; font-family: Arial, sans-serif;">, or </span></em><a href="https://twitter.com/ScottAMcGreal" target="_blank"><strong><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; text-decoration: none;">Twitter</span></strong></a><em><span style="background: white; font-family: Arial, sans-serif;">.<b><o:p></o:p></b></span></em></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<em><span style="background: white; font-family: Arial, sans-serif;"><br /></span></em></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: Arial, sans-serif;">© Scott McGreal. Please do not reproduce without
permission. Brief excerpts may be quoted as long as a link to the original
article is provided. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: Arial, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p>
</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: Arial, sans-serif;">This article also appears on Psychology Today on
my blog <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201409/what-do-heroes-and-psychopaths-have-in-common" target="_blank">Unique - Like Everybody Else</a>.</span><span style="color: red;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p><br /></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p><b>Image credits </b></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, 'DejaVu Sans', sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 20px;">Batman photo courtesy of </span><a data-cke-saved-href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Batman_(retouched).jpg" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Batman_(retouched).jpg" style="-webkit-transition: color 0.2s; color: #30529e; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, 'DejaVu Sans', sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 20px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s;" target="_blank">Wikimedia Commons</a></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, 'DejaVu Sans', sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 20px;">Sean Connery as James Bond from </span><a data-cke-saved-href="http://jamesbond.wikia.com/wiki/Sean_Connery" href="http://jamesbond.wikia.com/wiki/Sean_Connery" style="-webkit-transition: color 0.2s; color: #30529e; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, 'DejaVu Sans', sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 20px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s;" target="_blank">Wikia</a> </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>References <o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Dunlop, W. L., & Walker, L. J. (2013). The personality profile of
brave exemplars: A person-centered analysis. <i>Journal of Research in Personality, 47</i>(4), 380-384. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2013.03.004<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Miller, J. D., & Lynam, D. R. (2012). An examination of the
Psychopathic Personality Inventory's nomological network: A meta-analytic review.
<i>Personality Disorders: Theory, Research,
and Treatment, 3</i>(3), 305-326. doi: 10.1037/a0024567<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Patrick, C. J., Fowles, D. C., & Krueger, R. F. (2009). Triarchic
conceptualization of psychopathy: Developmental origins of disinhibition,
boldness, and meanness. <i>Development and
Psychopathology, 21</i>(Special Issue 03), 913-938. doi:
doi:10.1017/S0954579409000492<o:p></o:p></div>
<div style="text-indent: -48px;">
<span class="Z3988" title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+Research+in+Personality&rft_id=info%3Adoi%2F10.1016%2Fj.jrp.2013.05.006&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fresearchblogging.org&rft.atitle=Are+psychopaths+and+heroes+twigs+off+the+same+branch%3F+Evidence+from+college%2C+community%2C+and+presidential+samples&rft.issn=00926566&rft.date=2013&rft.volume=47&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=634&rft.epage=646&rft.artnum=http%3A%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com%2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS0092656613000822&rft.au=Smith%2C+S.&rft.au=Lilienfeld%2C+S.&rft.au=Coffey%2C+K.&rft.au=Dabbs%2C+J.&rfe_dat=bpr3.included=1;bpr3.tags=Psychology%2CPersonality%2C+psychopathy%2C+heroism">Smith, S., Lilienfeld, S., Coffey, K., & Dabbs, J. (2013). Are psychopaths and heroes twigs off the same branch? Evidence from college, community, and presidential samples <span style="font-style: italic;">Journal of Research in Personality, 47</span> (5), 634-646 DOI: <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2013.05.006" rev="review">10.1016/j.jrp.2013.05.006</a></span></div>
<br />
<div>
<br />
<div id="ftn1">
</div>
</div>
Scott McGrealhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13757633582829269183noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2304269645366413372.post-23146885847519633602015-01-19T16:21:00.000+11:002019-08-23T20:28:22.899+10:00Magic Mushroom Users who get High without Drugs<br /><div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
Psychedelic drugs, such as psilocybin have been of interest to psychologists due to their ability to induce altered states of intense well-being and profound personal significance. A recent study asked people, some who were psilocybin users and others who were not, about the best, most wonderful experiences of their lives. Some users said that the most wonderful experience occurred under the influence of psilocybin. Other users, who had their most wonderful experience while not under the drug’s influence, nevertheless reported a profound alteration of consciousness that was similar in some ways to the effects of psilocybin. For example, they described unusual visual hallucinations in addition to transcendental mystical states. Both groups of users said their most wonderful experience involved a more profoundly altered state of consciousness compared to the experiences of non-users. One possible implication of this study is that psilocybin could have lasting effects on a person’s ability to enter altered states of consciousness without drugs. However, further research is needed to confirm if this is actually the case.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; font-size: 13px; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjxw-j9gTehzSJebQ1lLS5aqDI_VXV-5k_7Bo7sku_-4WSKmKrRzPttnOdpzi8gS-cRT3Gi86E6Ffi2G3q7JInh07ZA2WrAVr4Uk-cHxk3SHfoJqAh1rTReEokfED2BPbVPi8f2YAJH3QA/s1600/psy-pink-peace.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="297" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjxw-j9gTehzSJebQ1lLS5aqDI_VXV-5k_7Bo7sku_-4WSKmKrRzPttnOdpzi8gS-cRT3Gi86E6Ffi2G3q7JInh07ZA2WrAVr4Uk-cHxk3SHfoJqAh1rTReEokfED2BPbVPi8f2YAJH3QA/s1600/psy-pink-peace.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #333333;">
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; padding: 4px; position: relative; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td class="tr-caption"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: 10.3999996185303px; line-height: 20px;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;">The intense visual phenomena induced by psychedelic drugs have inspired some remarkable art<br />Image Credit: </span></span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><a class="ext" href="http://sorrowdiess.deviantart.com/art/Psy-quot-Pink-quot-Peace-139611320" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; color: black; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, 'DejaVu Sans', sans-serif; line-height: 26px; text-align: start; word-wrap: break-word;" target="_blank">Psy - "Pink" - Peace<span class="ext" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: initial; background-image: url(https://cdn.psychologytoday.com/sites/all/modules/contrib/extlink/extlink_s.png); background-origin: initial; background-position: 2px 50%; background-repeat: no-repeat; background-size: initial; height: 10px; padding-right: 12px; text-decoration: none; width: 10px;"><span class="element-invisible" style="clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); height: 1px; overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important;">(link is external)</span></span></a><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , "dejavu sans" , sans-serif; line-height: 26px;"> by </span><a class="ext" href="http://sorrowdiess.deviantart.com/" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; color: black; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, 'DejaVu Sans', sans-serif; line-height: 26px; text-align: start; word-wrap: break-word;" target="_blank">sorrowdiess<span class="ext" style="background: url(https://cdn.psychologytoday.com/sites/all/modules/contrib/extlink/extlink_s.png) 2px 50% no-repeat; height: 10px; padding-right: 12px; text-decoration: none; width: 10px;"><span class="element-invisible" style="clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); height: 1px; overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important;">(link is external)</span></span></a><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , "dejavu sans" , sans-serif; line-height: 26px;"> via DeviantArt</span></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
</div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
Psychologists have long been interested in understanding the human capacity for intense well-being. Abraham Maslow, a pioneer of humanistic psychology, in particular coined the term “peak experiences” to refer to states in which a person feels intensely positive emotions such as great ecstasy, wonder and awe (Klavetter & Mogar, 1967). He considered peak experiences to be a sign of psychological health and thought that such experiences were particularly common in people who were fulfilling their deepest human potentials. Maslow conceptualised peak experiences as a perception of “Being” or “ultimate reality” in a mystical sense, although other researchers have used the term more broadly to refer to the most wonderful or best experiences in a person’s life.</div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
Pioneering studies in the 1960’s investigated the potential of psychedelic drugs such as LSD to induce peak experiences. For example, one study on LSD-assisted psychotherapy found that under the influence of LSD some people had experiences involving feelings of intense beauty, a sense of deeper perception of reality, and of self-transcendence (Klavetter & Mogar, 1967). Furthermore, those who had such experiences believed that they had gained lasting benefits, including greater insight into themselves and their relationships, and that they had become clearer about their values in life. On the other hand, some of the participants in the study did not have a peak experience and reported that they found the experience disappointing and confusing, or felt that they had temporarily gone mad. Hence, some people seem more likely to benefit from psychedelic drugs than others. For example, people who are highly open to new experiences seem to benefit most, while people who are emotionally unstable or rigidly conventional in their views are prone to greater anxiety and negative, disturbing experiences (Studerus, Kometer, Hasler, & Vollenweider, 2011).</div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
Research on psychedelic drugs was unfortunately suppressed in the 1970’s and has been resumed only in more recent years, and today uses somewhat more rigorous scientific methods. One well-known study, which I have discussed <a data-mce-href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/psilocybin-and-personality" href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/psilocybin-and-personality" target="_blank" title="Psilocybin and Personality">elsewhere</a>, also found that psilocybin, the active component of magic mushrooms, can induce profoundly positive experiences in certain people (Griffiths, Richards, McCann, & Jesse, 2006). In this study mentally stable adults volunteered to take psilocybin under supportive conditions. About two-thirds of participants had a “complete mystical experience” involving feelings of intense joy, timelessness, a sense of oneness with the universe and ego-transcendence, and feelings of profound insight into reality. In a fourteen month follow-up, nearly all of the participants who had a mystical experience said they regarded it as one of the most personally significant moments of their lives.</div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
The effects of psychedelic drugs are sensitive to features of the setting they are taken in. In the Griffiths et al. study psilocybin was administered in a safe comfortable setting with an assistant present to provide emotional support as needed to the volunteers. This helped to maximise the chance that they had a positive outcome. However, recreational users of psilocybin may be more casual about the kind of setting they create so the outcomes could be more variable. A recent study attempted to understand the outcomes of psilocybin use in more naturalistic recreational settings (Cummins & Lyke, 2013). In particular, the authors wanted to know how common peak experiences are among users and how they might compare to peak experiences reported by non-users. They gave a survey to 34 psilocybin users and 67 non-users, asking them to recall a peak experience, defined as the best experience or group of experiences in their lives. They then completed a questionnaire assessing the degree to which their peak experience involved alterations in their state of consciousness. Altered states of consciousness were assessed along three dimensions: oceanic boundlessness, which involves subjectively positive, mystical or transcendental experiences; visionary restructuralization, involving visual hallucinations and synaesthesia (crossover of sensory experiences, e.g. seeing music); and dread of ego dissolution, which includes negative experiences such as anxiety about one’s mental processes. Additionally, participants were asked if the peak experience had been induced by psilocybin and if they were under the influence of any other drugs at the time.</div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
Among psilocybin users, 47% reported that their peak experience had occurred under the influence of psilocybin, while the other users said that it had not. Consistent with previous research, those who reported that their peak experience occurred under psilocybin said that it involved very high levels of oceanic boundlessness and visionary restructuralization, as well as relatively high levels of dread of ego dissolution. This is comparable to the findings of the study by Griffiths et al. in which about a third of participants experienced a high level of anxiety at some stage even though they rated their overall experience as being highly positive. Perhaps more interesting was that psilocybin users whose peak experience had not been induced by psilocybin also reported that their peak experience involved high levels of oceanic boundlessness (their questionnaire scores being nearly as high as those who had their peak experience under psilocybin), as well as moderately high levels of visionary restructuralization (although somewhat lower than the other psilocybin users) but very low levels of dread of ego dissolution. For both groups of psilocybin users, their peak experiences involved considerably higher levels of oceanic boundlessness and visionary restructuralization compared to the peak experiences of those who had never used psilocybin. This indicates that lifetime peak experiences of psilocybin users involved more profound alterations of consciousness, whether they had or had not been induced by psilocybin, compared to the lifetime peak experiences of people who had never used.</div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
These results raise some fascinating questions that the study design was not able to answer. For example, it is unknown why some psilocybin users had the most wonderful experience of their lives under psilocybin while other users did not. Situational factors, such as the setting in which the drug was taken might have played a role, plus characteristic of the users themselves might also be a factor. For example, differences in the <a data-mce-href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201211/personalitys-big-one-reality-or-artifact" href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201211/personalitys-big-one-reality-or-artifact" target="_blank" title="Personality's 'Big One': Reality or Artifact?">personality</a> trait of absorption, one’s propensity to experience episode of “total attention”, are strongly linked to how profoundly a person responds to psilocybin (Studerus, Gamma, Kometer, & Vollenweider, 2012), so it is possible that the two groups of users might have differed on this trait. However, what I find even more intriguing is the fact that psilocybin users who had peak experiences without drugs nevertheless reported that these peak experiences involved intense alterations of consciousness that included visual hallucinations as well as mystical states. It would be interesting to know whether these peak experiences were spontaneous or deliberately sought. For example, there are specific practices designed to produce altered states without drugs, such as shamanic rituals, which can induce visionary experiences.</div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
It is also possible that people who have non-drug peak experiences involving visual phenomena might have distinctive personality traits compared to those who are not prone to such experiences. One study found that people who reported having peak experiences tend to have particular traits such as being more imaginative, less authoritarian and dogmatic, more tender-minded and more experimenting than people who had not reported such experiences (Mathes, 1982). People high in fantasy proneness have a natural tendency to have very vivid imaginative experiences, and it is possible that such people are more inclined to use psilocybin. Hence, the unusual results found by Cummins and Lyke might reflect the pre-existing characteristics of people who use psilocybin.</div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
However, another intriguing possibility is that psilocybin use itself might result in long-term changes in a person’s propensity to experience unusual visual phenomena. In a web-based survey, over 60% of people who had used psychedelic drugs reported that they had had unusual visual experiences while not under the influence of any drug (Baggott, Coyle, Erowid, Erowid, & Robertson, 2011). Furthermore, 23.9% said that such experiences occurred constantly or nearly constantly. Most people said that they were not bothered by them, although 4.2% said such experiences were sufficiently troublesome to warrant seeking treatment. These experiences came in a wide variety of types, including seeing halos or auras around things, things appearing to move or breathe, moving objects leaving after-images, seeing things with eyes open that are not really there, and more. The number of different visual phenomena a person experienced was proportional to the number of times they had taken psychedelic drugs, particularly LSD and psilocybin, although ketamine and salvia were also indicated. The reasons for these findings are not really known, although it could well be the case that taking psychedelic drugs such as psilocybin might increase a person’s propensity to experience hallucinatory visual phenomena in the long-term. If this is true, then it might explain why psilocybin users who had a peak experience that was not induced by drugs reported unusual visual experiences.</div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
In a previous <a data-mce-href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/psilocybin-and-personality" href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/psilocybin-and-personality" target="_blank" title="Psilocybin and Personality">article</a> I speculated about the possibility that psilocybin use could alter the sensitivity of neuroreceptors that underlie individual differences in the trait of absorption, a trait associated with having altered states of consciousness. A related possibility is that psilocybin and similar drugs might also alter the long-term sensitivity of neuroreceptors that underlie the experience of hallucinatory visual phenomena, which might explain why some users experience persistent unusual visual experiences. There is an additional and related possibility that psilocybin use increases a person’s tendency to have mystical peak experiences even when not using drugs. These are very speculative ideas and longitudinal research studies in which people are tracked for some time before and after initiating usage would be needed to determine if psilocybin does have long-term effects on a person’s consciousness. Further research on psychedelic drugs could help provide a deeper understanding of the nature of experiences associated with profound levels of well-being. </div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<strong><em>Please consider following me on </em></strong><a data-mce-href="https://www.facebook.com/UniqueLikeEverybodyElse" href="https://www.facebook.com/UniqueLikeEverybodyElse" target="_blank"><strong><em>Facebook,</em></strong></a> <a data-mce-href="https://plus.google.com/b/116570783533948602312/116570783533948602312/posts" href="https://plus.google.com/b/116570783533948602312/116570783533948602312/posts" target="_blank"><strong><em>Google Plus</em></strong></a><strong><em>, or </em></strong><a data-mce-href="https://twitter.com/ScottAMcGreal" href="https://twitter.com/ScottAMcGreal" target="_blank"><em><strong>Twitter</strong></em></a><strong><em>.</em></strong></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<strong><em><br /></em></strong></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
© Scott McGreal. Please do not reproduce without permission. Brief excerpts may be quoted as long as a link to the original article is provided. </div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt;">This article also appears on Psychology Today on
my blog <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201407/peak-experiences-in-psilocybin-users" title="Peak Experiences in Psilocybin Users">Unique - Like Everybody Else</a>.</span><span style="color: red;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<strong>Image Credit</strong></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<a data-mce-href="http://sorrowdiess.deviantart.com/art/Psy-quot-Pink-quot-Peace-139611320" href="http://sorrowdiess.deviantart.com/art/Psy-quot-Pink-quot-Peace-139611320" target="_blank">Psy - "Pink" - Peace</a> by <a data-mce-href="http://sorrowdiess.deviantart.com/" href="http://sorrowdiess.deviantart.com/" target="_blank">sorrowdiess</a> via DeviantArt</div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<strong>Other posts about psychedelic drugs</strong></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<a data-mce-href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/psilocybin-and-personality" href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/psilocybin-and-personality" target="_blank">Psilocybin and personality</a></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<a data-mce-href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/psilocybin-and-brain-function" href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/psilocybin-and-brain-function" target="_blank">Psilocybin and brain function</a></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<a data-mce-href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/psilocybin-anxiety-and-depression-in-cancer" href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/psilocybin-anxiety-and-depression-in-cancer" target="_blank">Psilocybin for anxiety and depression in cancer</a></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<a data-mce-href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/dmt-aliens-and-reality-part-1" href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/dmt-aliens-and-reality-part-1" target="_blank">DMT, aliens and reality – part 1</a></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<a data-mce-href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/dmt-aliens-and-reality-part-2" href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/dmt-aliens-and-reality-part-2" target="_blank">DMT, aliens and reality – part 2</a></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<a data-mce-href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201408/dmt-gateway-reality-fantasy-or-what" href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201408/dmt-gateway-reality-fantasy-or-what">DMT: Gateway to Reality, Fantasy or What?</a></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<a data-mce-href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201212/the-spirituality-psychedelic-drug-users" href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201212/the-spirituality-psychedelic-drug-users" target="_blank">The Spirituality of Psychedelic Drug Users</a></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<a data-mce-href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201405/can-cannabis-cause-psychosis-hard-question-answer" href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201405/can-cannabis-cause-psychosis-hard-question-answer" target="_blank">Can Cannabis Cause Psychosis? A Hard Question to Answer</a> (Admittedly cannabis is not a classic psychedelic, but still.)</div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>References <o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Baggott, M. J., Coyle, J. R., Erowid, E., Erowid, F., & Robertson, L.
C. (2011). Abnormal visual experiences in individuals with histories of
hallucinogen use: A web-based questionnaire. <i>Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 114</i>(1), 61-67. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2010.09.006<o:p></o:p></div>
<div style="text-indent: -48px;">
<span class="Z3988" title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+psychoactive+drugs&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F23909006&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fresearchblogging.org&rft.atitle=Peak+experiences+of+psilocybin+users+and+non-users.&rft.issn=0279-1072&rft.date=2013&rft.volume=45&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=189&rft.epage=94&rft.artnum=&rft.au=Cummins+C&rft.au=Lyke+J&rfe_dat=bpr3.included=1;bpr3.tags=Psychology%2CPersonality%2C+Psychedelic+Drugs">Cummins C, & Lyke J (2013). Peak experiences of psilocybin users and non-users. <span style="font-style: italic;">Journal of psychoactive drugs, 45</span> (2), 189-94 PMID: <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23909006" rev="review">23909006</a></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Griffiths, R. R., Richards, W. A., McCann, U., & Jesse, R. (2006). <a href="http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/press_releases/2006/griffithspsilocybin.pdf">Psilocybin can occasion mystical-type experiences having
substantial and sustained personal meaning and spiritual significance.</a> <i>Psychopharmacology,
187</i>(3), 268-283. doi: 10.1007/s00213-006-0457-5<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Klavetter, R. E., & Mogar, R. E. (1967). Peak Experiences:
Investigation of Their Relationship to Psychedelic Therapy and
Self-Actualization. <i>Journal of Humanistic
Psychology, 7</i>(2), 171-177. doi: 10.1177/002216786700700206<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Mathes, E. W. (1982). Peak Experience Tendencies: Scale Development and
Theory Testing. <i>Journal of Humanistic
Psychology, 22</i>(3), 92-108. doi: 10.1177/0022167882223011<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Studerus, E., Gamma, A., Kometer, M., & Vollenweider, F. X. (2012).
Prediction of Psilocybin Response in Healthy Volunteers. <i>PLoS ONE, 7</i>(2), e30800. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0030800<o:p></o:p></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Studerus, E., Kometer, M., Hasler, F., & Vollenweider, F.
X. (2011). Acute, subacute and long-term subjective effects of psilocybin in
healthy humans: a pooled analysis of experimental studies. <i>Journal of Psychopharmacology, 25</i>(11), 1434-1452. doi:
10.1177/0269881110382466<o:p></o:p></div>
Scott McGrealhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13757633582829269183noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2304269645366413372.post-29788256413460157072014-11-03T18:51:00.000+11:002014-11-07T14:02:43.313+11:00Cannabis Use and Psychosis: The Still Difficult Question of Causality<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="float: left; padding: 5px;"><a href="http://www.researchblogging.org/"><img alt="ResearchBlogging.org" src="http://www.researchblogging.org/public/citation_icons/rb2_large_gray.png" style="border: 0;" /></a></span><br />
Many studies have linked adolescent cannabis use and risk of becoming psychotic later in
life. However, the question of whether cannabis use actually causes some people
to become psychotic is a difficult one to answer and the evidence remains
inconclusive. Although it is possible that cannabis use could be a direct cause
of mental illness, it is also possible that both usage and mental illness are
caused by an underlying third factor. In support of this latter theory, a
recently published study comparing family history of mental illness in people
with schizophrenia who either have or have not used cannabis, suggests that
heavy cannabis use and risk of mental illness are both related to an underlying
genetic predisposition. Furthermore, long-term studies on cannabis use have
generally not considered that personality characteristics that have been linked
to mental illness might also prompt a person’s decision to use drugs such as
cannabis. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhgCjwrrNZcHDUPgmsSOlL6WE2PwhXWBkA3DJzYjrCL_gogU-cc-OuoeCx6wx0XJ6lBuOM0gbZDJRCuStL5adSYMgk-2mGZwcOXMUl_B3KeIRaRElkMzrcfu7LyI0fdCkkkwyhflIyMoIA/s1600/mystic_weed_rose_by_morbidkittycorpse-d3h3f7i.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhgCjwrrNZcHDUPgmsSOlL6WE2PwhXWBkA3DJzYjrCL_gogU-cc-OuoeCx6wx0XJ6lBuOM0gbZDJRCuStL5adSYMgk-2mGZwcOXMUl_B3KeIRaRElkMzrcfu7LyI0fdCkkkwyhflIyMoIA/s1600/mystic_weed_rose_by_morbidkittycorpse-d3h3f7i.jpg" height="226" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Cannabis, commonly known as marijuana and also by many other
names, is one of the most popular recreational drugs in the world. Although
many people try it without apparent ill effects, a large amount of evidence
exists that individuals who engage in heavy cannabis use before the age of 18
have an increased risk of developing a psychotic mental disorder later in life (McLaren, Silins, Hutchinson, Mattick, & Hall,
2010). Testing whether or not cannabis use actually causes people to
become psychotic is difficult to do, because the only truly conclusive way to
do so would involve experimenting on a bunch of people and randomly assigning them to either be users or non-users for a long period of time,
and assessing their mental health status before and after. Due to ethical
constraints this is not possible (especially in the current climate of
political correctness) so researchers have had to make do with alternative
study methods. The strongest evidence for a causal role of cannabis comes from
prospective cohort studies in which very large groups of people are initially
assessed in regards to their mental health and drug use, preferably in
adolescence, and then reassessed over a period of years. A review of 10 studies
involving seven cohorts in six different countries showed that all but one of
these studies found that there was an association between cannabis use and
later risk of psychosis (McLaren, et al., 2010).
For example, the first such study, and one the largest, assessed over 45,000
Swedish male conscripts aged 18 and then tracked how many were admitted to
hospital for schizophrenia over the next 15 years. This study found that those
who had used cannabis between 10 and 50 times before the age of 18 were three
times more likely to be hospitalised for schizophrenia compared to non-users,
while those who had used more than 50 times before age 18 had a six-fold risk
compared to non-users. Several other cohort studies also found that heavier
usage was associated with increased risk. To put this in perspective,
schizophrenia occurs in less than 1% of the general population (van Os & Kapur, 2009), so even if with
increased risk associated with heavy use, only a small minority of cannabis
users would be affected.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
While these prospective studies are consistent with the idea
of cannabis causing later psychosis, insofar as usage preceded the development
of symptoms and heavier usage was associated with higher risk, alternative
explanations for the relationship between cannabis usage and psychosis cannot
be ruled out. It is also possible that people who are at greater risk of
becoming mentally ill are also more inclined towards cannabis usage, or that
there is some third factor underlying both. For example, a limitation of the
Swedish cohort study was that it did not assess whether participants who became
mentally ill had also used other drugs after the age of 18, such as
amphetamines, that might lead to psychotic symptoms (McLaren, Silins, Hutchinson, Mattick, & Hall, 2010).
Furthermore, cohort studies mostly have not considered genetic factors or
personality traits that are associated with heavy use of cannabis and with risk
of psychotic disorder.<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%; mso-ansi-language: EN-AU; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">[1]</span></span></span>
People who choose to engage in heavy cannabis usage might do so because they
have characteristics that also predispose them to eventually become psychotic.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSvF1jx2roS6wmU1vSH3SBSeIhddSmWt3oLIwasC3Jy-kg4ZvRzmWsY33Pexx5xNNhlzNGc4198kURxJWAiv28218cwfL9AcXM_56Za-yMpQ2_ZjbIyQAYu7N33aSj_QG56gjT2p_HbRw/s1600/Artistic_view_of_how_the_world_feels_like_with_schizophrenia_-_journal.pmed.0020146.g001.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSvF1jx2roS6wmU1vSH3SBSeIhddSmWt3oLIwasC3Jy-kg4ZvRzmWsY33Pexx5xNNhlzNGc4198kURxJWAiv28218cwfL9AcXM_56Za-yMpQ2_ZjbIyQAYu7N33aSj_QG56gjT2p_HbRw/s1600/Artistic_view_of_how_the_world_feels_like_with_schizophrenia_-_journal.pmed.0020146.g001.jpg" height="320" width="318" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Artistic view of how the world feels like with schizophrenia</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The authors of a recent study have argued that that the
genetic/familial risk of schizophrenia is what accounts for the association
between cannabis use and schizophrenia (Proal,
Fleming, Galvez-Buccollini, & DeLisi, 2014). That is, cannabis use
is probably not the cause of schizophrenia but itself a manifestation of the
underlying genetic factors that also case schizophrenia. This study compared
people diagnosed with schizophrenia, who either did or did not have a history
of heavy cannabis use in adolescence prior to the onset of their illness, with
two comparison groups of people who did not have schizophrenia and who either
did or did not have a history of heavy cannabis use in adolescence.<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%; mso-ansi-language: EN-AU; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">[2]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span>
They then determined how many people in each group had first degree relatives
who had been diagnosed with a psychiatric illness. This was done in order to
assess the genetic/familial risk of schizophrenia for members of each group. If
cannabis has a special causative effect in the development of psychosis that
goes beyond pre-existing genetic risk, then cannabis users who had become
psychotic would be expected to have a lower genetic risk compared to non-users
who had become psychotic. What the authors found was that, compared to the two
comparison groups, people with schizophrenia had the same elevated level of
familial/genetic risk regardless of whether they had or had not used cannabis.
Hence, they argued that it is the genetic risk that is most likely the cause of
schizophrenia, and that cannabis use is unlikely to be the cause, although they
admitted that it might hasten the onset of symptoms. Additionally, relatives of
the two cannabis-using groups, had high rates of drug use in general, which is
in line with research indicating that some people have a genetic predisposition
to use drugs. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As well as family history of mental illness, certain
psychological characteristics are associated with an increased risk of
developing psychotic symptoms. Specifically, some people who are not clinically
disturbed have certain tendencies that resemble mild psychotic symptoms, such
as experiencing unusual perceptions (e.g. feeling that strangers can read you
mind) and holding peculiar beliefs about the nature of reality (e.g. that
aliens are influencing events on earth). Psychologists refer to these
tendencies as <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201301/troubled-souls-spirituality-mental-health-hazard" title="Troubled Souls: Spirituality as a Mental Health Hazard">schizotypy</a>,
because of their resemblance to more extreme symptoms observed in people with
schizophrenia. People with high levels of schizotypy have an elevated risk of
becoming fully psychotic later in life, although it is important to note that
this only occurs in a minority of people with these tendencies<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%; mso-ansi-language: EN-AU; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">[3]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span>
(Chapman, Chapman, Kwapil, Eckblad, &
Zinser, 1994). Many research studies have found that heavy users of
cannabis also tend to be high in schizotypy traits compared to non-users (Fridberg, Vollmer, O'Donnell, & Skosnik, 2011).
Additionally, older users tend to have more severe schizotypy traits compared
to younger users, suggesting that symptoms might increase over time in users.
Once again, it is difficult to say whether having schizotypy traits predisposes
people to use cannabis, or whether using cannabis increases schizotypy. It is
also possible there could be a two-way relationship. However, there is some
evidence that schizotypy traits in heavy users tend to emerge before they first
start using. One survey of users tested this by asking participants who
indicated that they had schizotypy symptoms to estimate when they first noticed
them occurring, and to state when they first began to use cannabis (Schiffman, Nakamura, Earleywine, & LaBrie, 2005).
In the majority of cases, participants said that they had first noticed having
schizotypy symptoms a few years before ever using cannabis. Of course this does
not necessarily mean that schizotypy causes people to use cannabis, but it may
well be a factor. More to the point, it is possible that heavy cannabis users
may have an increased risk of psychosis because they naturally tend to be
higher in schizotypy traits, rather than because of their drug use. However, it
is also possible that the two act in combination and may be mutually
reinforcing. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Schizotypy also tends to be associated with other <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201211/personalitys-big-one-reality-or-artifact" title="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201211/personalitys-big-one-reality-or-artifact">personality</a>
traits that may be relevant to mental health, such as high neuroticism, and low
conscientiousness and agreeableness. Neuroticism has been identified as an
independent risk factor for schizophrenia in prospective studies (van Os & Jones, 2001) and for mental
disorders in general (Malouff, Thorsteinsson,
& Schutte, 2005). Although heavy cannabis users tend to be higher in
schizotypy than non-users, they do not tend to be higher on neuroticism, although
they do tend to be lower than non-users in <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/personality-intelligence-and-race-realism" title="Personality, Intelligence, and "Race Realism""><span style="background: white; color: #333333; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">conscientiousness</span></a> and agreeableness,
as well as higher in <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/opening-the-mind-where-skepticism-and-superstition-meet" target="_blank" title="Opening the Mind"><span style="background: white; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">openness
to experience</span></a> (Fridberg, et al., 2011).
The majority of users, even heavy users, do not go on to develop psychotic
mental disorders, so perhaps there is a particular subset of users who are most
at risk. Fridberg et al. suggested that those who are not only high in
schizotypy but also high in neuroticism and openness to experience as well as
low in conscientiousness and agreeableness might be particularly vulnerable.
People who have a family history of mental illness would also be of particular
concern. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
To reiterate, determining the nature of the causal
connection between cannabis use and psychosis is very difficult. It is possible
that cannabis use during adolescence has a direct causal role, perhaps due to
the drug’s influence on the developing brain. However, the reasons that a
person chooses to take up cannabis use in the first place may reflect
pre-existing risk factors for psychosis, such as such as genetic/familial risk
and schizotypy traits. Future research studies should take these factors into
account in order to better help identify individuals who may be at the greatest
risk of harm. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Footnotes </b></div>
<hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" />
<div id="ftn1">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14.2666664123535px;">[1]</span></span></span> One cohort study using a genetic test found that in heavy users with a specific genetic polymorphism had an increased risk of psychosis compared to heavy users without it (Caspi et al.). However, a later study failed to confirm this result (McLaren, et al., 2010a).<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn2">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14.2666664123535px;">[2]</span></span></span> The authors were careful to include only people who had not used any other illicit drugs.<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn3">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14.2666664123535px;">[3]</span></span></span> In fact, some people with schizotypal tendencies are otherwise well-adjusted. Schizotypy is often associated with creativity and professional artists and stand-up comedians tend to be high in these traits. </div>
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<em><strong>Image</strong><strong> Credits</strong></em></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<em><strong><br /></strong></em></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<a data-mce-href="http://morbidkittycorpse.deviantart.com/art/Mystic-Weed-Rose-210111678" href="http://morbidkittycorpse.deviantart.com/art/Mystic-Weed-Rose-210111678" target="_blank">Mystic Weed Rose</a> by <a data-mce-href="http://morbidkittycorpse.deviantart.com/" href="http://morbidkittycorpse.deviantart.com/" target="_blank">MorbidKittyCorpse</a> at Deviant Art </div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
Schizophrenia/Internal Symmetry by Craig Finn courtesy of <a data-mce-href="https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Artistic_view_of_how_the_world_feels_like_with_schizophrenia_-_journal.pmed.0020146.g001.jpg" href="https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Artistic_view_of_how_the_world_feels_like_with_schizophrenia_-_journal.pmed.0020146.g001.jpg" target="_blank">Wikimedia Commons</a></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
Use of these artworks is permitted by the Creative Commons Licence and does not imply endorsement by the artists. </div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial",sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Please consider
following me on </span></i></b><a href="https://www.facebook.com/UniqueLikeEverybodyElse"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial",sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Facebook,</span></i></b></a> <a href="https://plus.google.com/b/116570783533948602312/116570783533948602312/posts"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial",sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Google Plus</span></i></b></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial",sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">, or </span></i></b><a href="https://twitter.com/ScottAMcGreal" target="_blank"><em><b><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial",sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">Twitter</span></b></em></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial",sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial",sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial",sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">© Scott McGreal. Please do not
reproduce without permission. Brief excerpts may be quoted as long as a link to
the original article is provided. </span><o:p></o:p><br />
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial",sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span>
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial",sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial",sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt;">This article also appears on Psychology Today on
my blog <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201405/can-cannabis-cause-psychosis-hard-question-answer" title="Can Cannabis Cause Psychosis? A Hard Question to Answer">Unique - Like
Everybody Else</a>.</span><span style="color: red;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial",sans-serif; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Posts I have written about
psychedelic drugs (which are not linked to psychosis)<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/psilocybin-and-personality">Psilocybin
and personality</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/psilocybin-and-brain-function">Psilocybin
and brain function</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/psilocybin-anxiety-and-depression-in-cancer">Psilocybin
for anxiety and depression in cancer</a><o:p></o:p><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-outline-level: 1;">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201407/peak-experiences-in-psilocybin-users">Peak Experiences in Psilocybin Users</a> <span style="color: blue; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU; mso-font-kerning: 18.0pt; mso-themecolor: hyperlink;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/dmt-aliens-and-reality-part-1">DMT,
aliens and reality – part 1</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/dmt-aliens-and-reality-part-2">DMT,
aliens and reality – part 2</a><o:p></o:p><br />
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201408/dmt-gateway-reality-fantasy-or-what" target="_blank">DMT: Gateway to reality, fantasy, or what?</a> </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-outline-level: 1;">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201212/the-spirituality-psychedelic-drug-users">The Spirituality of Psychedelic Drug Users</a><span style="color: #0563c1; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU; mso-font-kerning: 18.0pt; mso-themecolor: hyperlink;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
<b>References <o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Caspi, A., Moffitt, T. E., Cannon, M., McClay, J., Murray, R., Harrington,
H., . . . Craig, I. W. Moderation of the Effect of Adolescent-Onset Cannabis
Use on Adult Psychosis by a Functional Polymorphism in the
Catechol-O-Methyltransferase Gene: Longitudinal Evidence of a Gene X
Environment Interaction. <i>Biological
Psychiatry, 57</i>(10), 1117-1127. doi: <o:p></o:p><a data-mce-href="http://www.biologicalpsychiatryjournal.com/article/S0006-3223(05)00103-4/abstract" href="http://www.biologicalpsychiatryjournal.com/article/S0006-3223(05)00103-4/abstract" style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;" target="_blank">10.1016/j.biopsych.2005.01.026</a> </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Chapman, L. J., Chapman, J. P., Kwapil, T. R., Eckblad, M., & Zinser,
M. C. (1994). Putatively Psychosis-Prone Subjects 10 Years Later. <i>Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 103</i>(2),
171-183. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Fridberg, D. J., Vollmer, J. M., O'Donnell, B. F., & Skosnik, P. D.
(2011). Cannabis users differ from non-users on measures of personality and
schizotypy. <i>Psychiatry Research, 186</i>(1),
46-52. doi: <o:p></o:p><a data-mce-href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2010.07.035" href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2010.07.035" style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;" target="_blank">http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2010.07.035</a> </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Malouff, J. M., Thorsteinsson, E. B., & Schutte, N. S. (2005). The
Relationship Between the Five-Factor Model of Personality and Symptoms of Clinical
Disorders: A Meta-Analysis. <i>Journal of
Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 27</i>(2), 101-114. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
<span class="Z3988" title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.jtitle=The+International+journal+on+drug+policy&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F19783132&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fresearchblogging.org&rft.atitle=Assessing+evidence+for+a+causal+link+between+cannabis+and+psychosis%3A+a+review+of+cohort+studies.&rft.issn=0955-3959&rft.date=2010&rft.volume=21&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=10&rft.epage=9&rft.artnum=&rft.au=McLaren+JA&rft.au=Silins+E&rft.au=Hutchinson+D&rft.au=Mattick+RP&rft.au=Hall+W&rfe_dat=bpr3.included=1;bpr3.tags=Psychology%2CPersonality%2C+Cannabis%2C+Psychopathology%2C+Schizophrenia">McLaren JA, Silins E, Hutchinson D, Mattick RP, & Hall W (2010). Assessing evidence for a causal link between cannabis and psychosis: a review of cohort studies. <span style="font-style: italic;">The International journal on drug policy, 21</span> (1), 10-9 PMID: <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19783132" rev="review">19783132</a></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Proal, A. C., Fleming, J., Galvez-Buccollini, J. A., & DeLisi, L. E.
(2014). A controlled family study of cannabis users with and without psychosis.
<i>Schizophrenia Research, 152</i>(1),
283-288. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Schiffman, J., Nakamura, B., Earleywine, M., & LaBrie, J. (2005).
Symptoms of schizotypy precede cannabis use. <i>Psychiatry Research, 134</i>(1), 37-42. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2005.01.004<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
van Os, J., & Jones, P. B. (2001). Neuroticism as a risk
factor for schizophrenia. <i>Psychol Med, 31</i>,
1129 - 1134. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
van Os, J., & Kapur, S. (2009). Schizophrenia. <i>The Lancet, 374</i>(9690), 635-645. </div>
<div>
<div id="ftn3">
</div>
</div>
Scott McGrealhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13757633582829269183noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2304269645366413372.post-9425600755579881362014-07-23T13:16:00.000+10:002014-07-23T13:18:30.181+10:00Heroes and Villains: Banal or Special People? Part 2 of 2<div style="background: white; margin: 0cm 0cm 18pt;">
<span style="line-height: 18px;"><span style="float: left; padding: 5px;"><a href="http://www.researchblogging.org/"><img alt="ResearchBlogging.org" src="http://www.researchblogging.org/public/citation_icons/rb2_large_gray.png" style="border: 0;" /></a></span></span><br />
<div style="line-height: 13.5pt;">
In <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201404/challenging-the-banality-evil-and-heroism-part-1" target="_blank">part 1</a> of this post, I discussed
the situationist analysis of the “banality” of evil and of heroism
respectively. To recap, according to Phil Zimbardo and colleagues, both heroic
acts and evil acts occur primarily in response to situational factors, rather
than internal features of the person. However, on closer inspection, the
situationist analysis provides inconsistent accounts of how each of these
occurs. Evil actions are attributed to factors entirely outside the person,
while heroism relies on the person’s inner qualities. In this post, I explore
these inconsistencies in more detail and consider some relevant evidence. <o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div align="center" style="background: white; line-height: 13.5pt; margin-bottom: 18.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-align: center;">
<b>The false dichotomy of dispositions vs.
situations<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In developing his situationist
explanation of why “good” people do evil things, Zimbardo draws heavily on
his analysis of the <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201309/individual-differences-in-the-stanford-prison-experiment" title="Individual Differences in the Stanford Prison Experiment">Stanford
Prison Experiment</a> (SPE), in which students
recruited to act as guards in a mock prison engaged in abuse and mistreatment
of students recruited to act as prisoners. Zimbardo has drawn many parallels
between the SPE and the prisoner abuse that occurred at Abu Ghraib. In both
cases, Zimbardo has argued that the horrendous behavior of those involved can
be explained pretty much entirely as a result of external factors and that “dispositional”
factors internal to the person are irrelevant. He <a href="http://talesfromthelou.wordpress.com/2013/03/07/philip-zimbardo-why-do-good-people-do-evil-things/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">stat<span class="MsoHyperlink">es</span></a>:<o:p></o:p></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
When
you put that set of horrendous work conditions and external factors together,
it creates an evil barrel. <i>You could put
virtually anybody in it and you’re going to get this kind of evil behavior.</i>
The Pentagon and the military say that the Abu Ghraib scandal is the result of
a few bad apples in an otherwise good barrel. That’s a dispositional analysis.
The social psychologist in me, and the consensus among many of my colleagues in
experimental social psychology, says that’s the wrong analysis. It’s not the
bad apples, it’s the bad barrels that corrupt good people. Understanding the
abuses at this Iraqi prison starts with an analysis of both the situational and
systematic forces operating on those soldiers working the night shift in that
‘little shop of horrors.’ <i>(Emphasis
added)</i></blockquote>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXQIpmIdkH-lQyvKVjvYNWF-ibGoTXq_4_u-_CDWNAp2K-GHt3IRlkGNE8oso4g5UIcdCm4gPcMJ-xWerHBjXW1a8-78DfVlaL6eRK9kckxlLjIs3Gh_7Pn84U04Zw6Xxq-4e69qXFd64/s1600/Abu-ghraib-leash.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXQIpmIdkH-lQyvKVjvYNWF-ibGoTXq_4_u-_CDWNAp2K-GHt3IRlkGNE8oso4g5UIcdCm4gPcMJ-xWerHBjXW1a8-78DfVlaL6eRK9kckxlLjIs3Gh_7Pn84U04Zw6Xxq-4e69qXFd64/s1600/Abu-ghraib-leash.jpg" height="269" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 20px; text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Was this woman just a victim of circumstance? Does the situation absolve her of responsibility? </span></span><span style="text-align: left;"> </span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
As
can be seen from the foregoing, situationists explicitly reject what they call
“dispositionalist” explanations that invoke <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201211/personalitys-big-one-reality-or-artifact" target="_blank">personality traits</a> to explain why
people behaved the way they did in such situations. Supposedly, those who are
inclined to a dispositional analysis want to pin all the blame on the “bad
apples” involved, while ignoring the importance of the all-powerful “bad
barrel” that is the real cause of all the horrendous things that were done
there. As I noted previously, situationists pay lip service to the notion that
behavior, including prisoner abuse is the product of the interaction between
features of the situation and features of the person. (See this <a href="http://www.donotlink.com/framed?28512" target="_blank" title="Person X Situation X System Dynamics">article</a> by Zimbardo for example, where he responds to criticisms of
situationism.) However, in practice he and his colleagues have expressed scorn
for the idea that it might be worthwhile to consider the relevant personality
traits of those who engaged in abusive behavior in the SPE and at Abu Ghraib. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;">
<b>The
importance of self-selection<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
Specifically,
personality psychologists have argued that self-selection played an important
role in what happened both in the SPE and at Abu Ghraib. That is, people with
certain personality traits that may predispose them to abusive behavior may be
more likely than others to volunteer to either join a prison experiment or to
work as prison guards respectively (Carnahan
& McFarland, 2007). To provide evidence for this, they conducted an
experiment to test whether people who would volunteer for a prison experiment
(“a psychological study of prison life) had different personality traits from
people who would volunteer for a non-specific psychology experiment (simply “a
psychological study”). (Neither one of the advertised “psychological
studies” actually went ahead, as the real experiment was to see who would
volunteer for each one.) Those who volunteered
for the prison experiment were found to differ significantly from the control
group on seven distinct personality traits related to aggressive tendencies.
Specifically, the prison experiment volunteers were noticeably high on measures
of aggression, authoritarianism, Machiavellianism, narcissism, and <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201406/are-dog-people-more-prejudiced-cat-people" title="Are Dog People More Prejudiced Than Cat People?">social dominance</a>,
and also lower on altruism and dispositional empathy. Carnahan and McFarland argued
that people tend to make choices to enter situations that allow them to express
their personalities. Hence situations that lend themselves to abuse may be
particularly attractive to people who are inclined to become abusive. The
researchers were careful to point out that they were not denying the power of
these situations to influence behavior. In fact, they argued that situations
such as a prison where abuse is condoned act to reinforce and amplify
pre-existing tendencies to be abusive (McFarland
& Carnahan, 2009). <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;">
<b>Do
personal choices matter at all? <o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
In
their response to this study, Haney and Zimbardo (2009) attacked the authors for their supposed “dispositionalism”
which they argued was an attempt to draw attention away from larger systemic
factors that facilitated abuse while neatly blaming the actors involved, who
were really just decent people caught up in terrible circumstances. Haney and
Zimbardo blatantly parody the idea of self-selection, saying: “therefore,
whatever extreme behavior people engage in is the product of their free and
autonomous choice making, largely unencumbered by circumstance or context.”
They go on to argue that most choices that people make are “highly
situationally constrained” and determined less by personality than other
factors such as economics. The idea that people’s choices must be ‘unencumbered’
or they have no real choice at all, strikes me as a false dichotomy, much
like the false dichotomy between “bad apples” and a “bad barrel”. Ignoring the
role of systemic factors at Abu Ghraib, such as policies and practices
implicitly condoning prisoner abuse, would surely be a mistake. But ignoring
the role of individual differences and the capacity for individual choice would
also be a mistake. A comprehensive understanding of the causes of things like
prisoner abuse requires attention to all the relevant variables involved. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
McFarland and Carnahan
acknowledged that something like Abu Ghraib can indeed induce abusive behavior.
However, they argued that a model based on “the power of the situation” is too
limited because it overlooks the importance of self-selection and selection by
others and treats individual differences as irrelevant (2009). McFarland and Carnahan also challenge Zimbardo’s claims
that the abusers at Abu Ghraib, and people who have engaged in government
sanctioned torture in Greece and Brazil, were just “ordinary, normal” people
corrupted by situational forces. Although Zimbardo
claimed that “virtually anybody” in the situation at Abu Ghraib would act the
same way – a sweeping generalization for which little or no evidence is
provided – there is evidence that at least some of the abusers at Abu
Ghraib volunteered for duty and that they had predispositions to abusive
behaviour. A psychiatrist who investigated Abu Ghraib concluded that both
situational and dispositional factors played a role on the abuse, and cited
“psychological factors of negativity, hatred, and desire to dominate and
humiliate” (McFarland
& Carnahan, 2009). <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;">
<b>Who has
what it takes to do evil? <o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
McFarland and Carnahan
also point out that although Zimbardo and colleagues have claimed that
torturers in Greece and Brazil were just ordinary people, research on this
topic has found that those who were recruited for this role were carefully
screened and selected for personal characteristics such as sympathetic
attitudes to the reigning military regime and for conformity and
conventionalism. Those who passed the screening then freely selected to go
through intensive training. They were further screened for blind obedience to
authority and for their ability to endure beatings. They were hardly ‘ordinary’
in the sense of being fairly representative of men of their age. McFarland and
Carnahan point out that these sort of attitudes are consistent with an authoritarian
personality profile. If it were true, as Zimbardo claims, that “virtually
anyone” could be made to do evil things under the right circumstances, why
would those responsible for recruiting torturers go to so much trouble to
select suitable candidates? <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;">
<b>Double
standards for doing good and evil<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
What
I also find disturbing about claims about the power of the situation to
overrule individual choices is that it seems to locate all moral responsibility
for evil behavior outside the persons involved, as if the participants in this
drama were utterly powerless to act any differently. Indeed, Haney and Zimbardo
seem to imply that unless people are “unencumbered by circumstance or
context” their personal ability to make choices has little or no relevance to how
they behave. Yet when it comes to heroic choices, the
picture presented is almost the complete opposite of this. Heroes turn out to
be those who have cultivated a “heroic imagination” and who have had the
courage to make difficult decisions in situations where they were under
considerable pressure to turn a blind eye to wrong-doings in their environment.
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;">
<b>Just how
“banal” is heroism really? <o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 13.5pt; margin-bottom: 18.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
Consider an
example of the “banality of heroism” that occurred at Abu Ghraib, described in
an article on Zimbardo’s <a href="http://www.lucifereffect.com/articles/heroism.pdf" title="The Banality of Heroism">website</a>. (Scroll
down to the last page of the document, and see the sidebar story, “The Prison
Guard’s Dilemma” by Jason Marsh.) This describes the story of Sergeant Joseph
Darby, a prison guard at Abu Ghraib who became aware of prisoner abuse and made
a brave decision to report it instead of turning a blind eye. According to the
article, Darby decided to act in spite of the culture of the prison which
“persuaded everyone else to perform or accept prisoner abuse.” He did this
because he believed it was his moral duty, even though it meant that for a
month and a half he “lived in a state of perpetual fear” of retaliation by the
other guards if they found out what he had done. Since then he has been hailed
as a hero, yet vilified by others, and now lives in hiding after going into
protective custody. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 13.5pt; margin-bottom: 18.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
Here we have
a case of a man who performed a very brave action that put his own safety at
risk because he believed that it was the morally right thing to do. Yet this is
described as “banal” because apparently he was just an “ordinary” man. (As
opposed to what, a superman?) To my mind, the “banal” (i.e. common, ordinary)
response in this situation would be to go along with the crowd and cave in to
pressure to do nothing. Furthermore, far from being “unencumbered by
circumstance or context,” he was under considerable
situational constraint, yet still managed to resist the power of the “bad
barrel” that corrupted many others who did not show his courage. It is far from
clear to me how this example can be explained in terms of purely situational
factors that pushed the man in question into acting heroically. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 13.5pt; margin-bottom: 18.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
Another case
of heroism <a href="http://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/the_banality_of_heroism" title="The Banality of Heroism">cited</a> by Franco
and Zimbardo illustrates the ability of individuals to make conscious choices
to resist situational forces in order to uphold moral values. Chiune Sugihara,
a Japanese consul official in Lithuania in 1940, assisted more than 2,000 Jews
to escape the Nazi invasion, in spite of direct orders by his government not to
do so. Franco and Zimbardo point out that not only was this a difficult
decision for him, but it was one that he thought about carefully over a long
period of time. Discussing Sugihara’s personal history, they point out that: <o:p></o:p></div>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 13.5pt; margin-bottom: 18.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
These
incidents suggest that Sugihara already possessed the internal strength and
self-assurance necessary to be guided by his own moral compass in uncertain
situations. We can speculate that Sugihara was more willing to assert his
individual view than others around him who preferred to “go along to get
along.”</blockquote>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 13.5pt; margin-bottom: 18.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
Franco and
Zimbardo therefore acknowledge that internal features of the person such as “internal
strength and self-assurance” are needed to make moral decisions in difficult
situations. This is in direct contrast to Zimbardo’s statements implying that
heroism is a result of external circumstances and is unrelated to internal
qualities of the person. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div align="center" style="background: white; line-height: 13.5pt; margin-bottom: 18.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-align: center;">
<b>The importance of
character<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 13.5pt; margin-bottom: 18.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
Franco and
Zimbardo <a href="http://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/the_banality_of_heroism" title="The Banality of Heroism">acknowledge</a> that
they do not actually know what prompts some people to take action when heroism
is called for. They even consider briefly that those who do so may be more
conscientious or they may be less risk averse. <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/personality-intelligence-and-race-realism" target="_blank">Conscientiousness</a> and risk
aversion are personality traits, so it seems that “dispositional” explanations
are no longer completely off the table. However, they spend much more time
discussing the importance of the “heroic imagination” and ways in which it can
be nurtured so that ordinary people can learn to become heroes. They define the
heroic imagination as “the capacity to imagine facing physically or socially
risky situations, to struggle with the hypothetical problems these situations
generate, and to consider one’s actions and the consequences.” They then go on
to enumerate a number of steps a person can take to foster this. These
steps amount to developing the willingness to hold to
a code of ethical conduct and act with integrity even when under pressure
rationalise inaction or justify evil deeds. Additionally one must be able to
“transcend anticipating negative consequences associated with some forms of
heroism, such as being socially ostracized.” To my mind, these things sounds
much like what lay people would call developing “character,” the inner strength
to act with integrity and the courage of one’s convictions. In other words one
must develop the ability to resist external situational forces and follow an
internal moral compass. Ultimately, Franco and Zimbardo state that there must
be “a hero’s willingness to accept any of the consequences of heroic
action—whether the sacrifices are physical or social.” <o:p></o:p></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj8EklQneuw0NfhIAU7rUU3kBbByzaHMa9gRa5360F3HncTSJF3xhrS_KOAG4pyMjmhDJ3WP5slPk5FFX3mdQHXUtY0fMBtC4Syk4UZqoP4Ckckia5SvSWCEEsL00R95JdeeoDSx51_XEQ/s1600/frodo_baggins_by_sykaaa-d4hs3z4.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj8EklQneuw0NfhIAU7rUU3kBbByzaHMa9gRa5360F3HncTSJF3xhrS_KOAG4pyMjmhDJ3WP5slPk5FFX3mdQHXUtY0fMBtC4Syk4UZqoP4Ckckia5SvSWCEEsL00R95JdeeoDSx51_XEQ/s1600/frodo_baggins_by_sykaaa-d4hs3z4.jpg" height="320" width="213" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 20px; text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Heroes need the strength of character to resist evil forces</span></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 13.5pt; margin: 0cm 0cm 18pt; text-align: center;">
<b style="line-height: 13.5pt;">Conclusion</b></div>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 13.5pt; margin-bottom: 18.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
I find much
of what Franco and Zimbardo are saying about heroism to be commendable,
particularly the concept of willingness to accept the consequences of one’s
actions. However, now I need to ask how this is compatible with the view that
when people do evil it is because they are the victim of circumstances and
forces outside of themselves? If ordinary people have the capacity to become
heroes who take a stand against injustice, then surely they are responsible for
their actions when they choose instead to do evil. If ordinary people can
develop the strength of character to resist situational forces, then does not
this imply that those who do not so resist are of weak character? Why not hold
evil-doers and heroes alike to the same moral standards of accountability for
their actions? I do not mean to imply that situational forces that act upon a
person should be disregarded. What I am arguing is for a balanced perspective
which takes into account the nature of the person who responds to these forces,
including their capacity to make responsible choices. Personality psychologist
David Funder (2006) has argued that situationist
accounts appear to condone an ideology of victimisation in which people are not
to blame for their actions because the real causes lie outside themselves. He
contrasts this with a more person-centred approach that favours being true to
oneself and the human capacity to develop a consistent self that seeks to control
one’s destiny rather than remain a pawn of situational forces. An ideology of
victimisation is also incompatible with the development of the heroic
imagination. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Please consider
following me on </span></i></b><a href="https://www.facebook.com/UniqueLikeEverybodyElse"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Facebook,</span></i></b></a> <a href="https://plus.google.com/b/116570783533948602312/116570783533948602312/posts"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Google Plus</span></i></b></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">, or </span></i></b><a href="https://twitter.com/ScottAMcGreal" target="_blank"><em><b><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">Twitter</span></b></em></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">© Scott McGreal. Please do not
reproduce without permission. Brief excerpts may be quoted as long as a link to
the original article is provided. <o:p></o:p></span><br />
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span>
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">This article also appears on Psychology Today on
my blog <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201405/challenging-the-banality-evil-and-heroism-part-2" target="_blank">Unique - Like Everybody Else</a>.</span><span style="color: red;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<strong>Image Credits</strong></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
Photo of prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib courtesy of <a data-mce-href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Abu-ghraib-leash.jpg" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Abu-ghraib-leash.jpg" target="_blank">Wikimedia Commons</a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;"></span></div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
Frodo Baggins by <a data-mce-href="http://sykaaa.deviantart.com/" href="http://sykaaa.deviantart.com/" target="_blank">sykaaa</a> at <a data-mce-href="http://sykaaa.deviantart.com/art/Frodo-Baggins-271729696" href="http://sykaaa.deviantart.com/art/Frodo-Baggins-271729696" target="_blank">DeviantART</a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>References <o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
<span class="Z3988" title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.jtitle=Personality+%26+social+psychology+bulletin&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F17440210&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fresearchblogging.org&rft.atitle=Revisiting+the+Stanford+prison+experiment%3A+could+participant+self-selection+have+led+to+the+cruelty%3F&rft.issn=0146-1672&rft.date=2007&rft.volume=33&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=603&rft.epage=14&rft.artnum=&rft.au=Carnahan+T&rft.au=McFarland+S&rfe_dat=bpr3.included=1;bpr3.tags=Psychology%2CPersonality%2C+Ethics%2C+Social+Psychology">Carnahan T, & McFarland S (2007). Revisiting the Stanford prison experiment: could participant self-selection have led to the cruelty? <span style="font-style: italic;">Personality & social psychology bulletin, 33</span> (5), 603-14 PMID: <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17440210" rev="review">17440210</a></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Funder, D. C. (2006). Towards a resolution of the personality triad:
Persons, situations, and behaviors. <i>Journal
of Research in Personality, 40</i>(1), 21-34. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2005.08.003<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Haney, C., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2009). Persistent Dispositionalism in
Interactionist Clothing: Fundamental Attribution Error in Explaining Prison
Abuse. <i>Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 35</i>(6), 807-814. doi: 10.1177/0146167208322864<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
McFarland, S., & Carnahan, T. (2009). A Situation's First
Powers Are Attracting Volunteers and Selecting Participants: A Reply to Haney
and Zimbardo (2009). <i>Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 35</i>(6), 815-818. doi: 10.1177/0146167209334781<o:p></o:p></div>
Scott McGrealhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13757633582829269183noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2304269645366413372.post-6758949251460099252014-07-01T15:49:00.001+10:002014-07-23T13:22:30.801+10:00Heroes and Villains: Banal or Special People? Part 1 of 2<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="float: left; padding: 5px;"><a href="http://www.researchblogging.org/"><img alt="ResearchBlogging.org" src="http://www.researchblogging.org/public/citation_icons/rb2_large_gray.png" style="border: 0;" /></a></span><br />
What moves a person to become a hero or a villain? Do people
perform heroic actions, acts which involve genuine risk to themselves, because
they are special people, or is it just a matter of circumstance, being in the
right place at the right time? Do people who perform evil actions do so because
of flaws in their character, or are they just victims of an evil system that
corrupts the innocent, inducing otherwise “good” people to do terrible things?
Those who subscribe to situationism, such as Phil Zimbardo, have argued that
given the proper circumstances virtually anyone could either become a hero or
an evil-doer. Zimbardo has argued that the “banality of heroism” mirrors the
apparent “banality of evil.” That is, people choose to perform either heroic or
evil deeds mainly according to the circumstances in which they find themselves,
rather than because of any inner qualities of goodness or pathology they might
possess. However, a closer examination of Zimbardo’s writings on the subject
reveals apparent double standards for good and evil, in that evil actions are
attributed to external forces imposing upon a person, whereas heroic actions
are attributed to internal qualities that empower a person to resist
situational pressures towards apathy and inaction. Zimbardo’s own writings on
the subject suggest that heroism is far from banal because heroic action
involves doing the brave thing in situations when the more commonplace response
would be to do nothing. Since heroes take responsibility for the consequences of
their actions, does that not mean that evil-doers are responsible for their
choices too? <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiCzNabeasFiYyAM56gio_90jqfcfeegD6HkTqmF6LWZ-U3omDxxp2tcRSezQ-Ktg016Ay0Q4iHLIod6BmcSuJLjdCDtyf8RiZtwGglrAbPUgIg1LO_b1iO_SDVfxWYLEAiujBSGzrMbKA/s1600/693px-Unico_Anello.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiCzNabeasFiYyAM56gio_90jqfcfeegD6HkTqmF6LWZ-U3omDxxp2tcRSezQ-Ktg016Ay0Q4iHLIod6BmcSuJLjdCDtyf8RiZtwGglrAbPUgIg1LO_b1iO_SDVfxWYLEAiujBSGzrMbKA/s1600/693px-Unico_Anello.png" height="173" width="200" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 11px; text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: small;">Sometimes people must choose between good and evil. But how do they decide?</span></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b>Personal power and situational power: opposed or complementary forces?</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
One of the more generally accepted
theories in psychology is that behavior results from an interaction of the
internal features of the person (e.g. their <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201211/personalitys-big-one-reality-or-artifact" title="Personality's 'Big One': Reality or Artifact?">personality</a>, motives, and values) and the external features of the
situation, such as social pressures to behave a certain way. However, according
to the school of thought called situationism, there are situations that
are so powerful that they pretty much compel people to act in certain ways,
regardless of their internal dispositions or even their moral values. This view
is particularly associated with Phil Zimbardo, who claimed that “<span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">A large body of evidence in
social psychology supports the concept that</span> situational power triumphs
over individual power in certain contexts” (2007).
I am not sure what body of evidence exactly he is referring to with this
statement, as a <a href="http://jenni.uchicago.edu/Spencer_Conference/Representative%20Papers/Richard%20et%20al,%202003.pdf" title="One Hundred Years of Social Psychology Quantitatively Described">meta-analysis</a>
of 100 years of research in social psychology found that the average effect
size of social influence on behavior was actually smaller than the effect of
personality (Richard, Bond Jr, &
Stokes-Zoota, 2003).<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">[1]</span></span></span><!--[endif]--></span>
Zimbardo has argued that powerful situations can induce “good” people to do
evil things. In particular, he has claimed that abusive behaviors that occurred
in the (in)famous Stanford Prison Experiment (which I
have analyzed in a previous <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201309/individual-differences-in-the-stanford-prison-experiment" title="Individual Differences in the Stanford Prison Experiment">post</a>) and at Abu Ghraib
prison can be explained in terms of external situational forces rather than the
personal characteristics of those who were involved. More recently, Zimbardo
has argued that situationism can <a href="http://edge.org/response-detail/10421" title="2006: What is your dangerous idea? The banality of evil is matched by the banality of heroism">explain</a>
not only the extremes of evil but the extremes of good as well: <o:p></o:p></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18px;">The banality of evil is matched by the banality of heroism. Both are not the consequence of dispositional tendencies, not special inner attributes of pathology or goodness residing within the human psyche or the human genome. Both emerge in particular situations at particular times when situational forces play a compelling role in moving individuals across the decisional line from inaction to action.</span></blockquote>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 13.5pt; margin-bottom: 18.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 13.5pt; margin-bottom: 18.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
In this
view, situational forces <i>move</i> people,
<i>pushing</i> some people to do evil,
others to turn a blind eye to evil-doers, while still others act heroically to
right wrongs at great personal risk. In an article arguing for this
situationist explanation, Zeno Franco and Zimbardo <a href="http://www.lucifereffect.com/heroism.htm" title="Celebrating Heroism">stated</a> that “Some situations can inflame the ‘hostile
imagination,’ propelling good people to do bad deeds, <i>while something in that same setting</i> can inspire the ‘heroic imagination’
propelling ordinary people toward actions that their culture at a given time
determines is ‘heroic.’”<span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"> </span>(Emphasis added.) <o:p></o:p></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-tSEfirR1bYopJHD0ypjIqGJstdRT-hsTKHphUjPNwoyqPtHMxWPv8HdIKAwATKKQ2Q3x0DhO79jpPYfx-k26XsprT2jm4Wls6JkGqRMO0ZzGTltSbx9aNqkx0-JH4CHIgAyy2YKFWgs/s1600/William_Wallace.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-tSEfirR1bYopJHD0ypjIqGJstdRT-hsTKHphUjPNwoyqPtHMxWPv8HdIKAwATKKQ2Q3x0DhO79jpPYfx-k26XsprT2jm4Wls6JkGqRMO0ZzGTltSbx9aNqkx0-JH4CHIgAyy2YKFWgs/s1600/William_Wallace.jpg" height="320" width="289" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 11px; text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: small;">The real life Braveheart: was he just an ordinary guy after all?</span></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 13.5pt; margin: 0cm 0cm 18pt; text-align: center;">
<b>Situations as a personality test</b></div>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 13.5pt; margin-bottom: 18.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
In the
language of social psychology, the situationist view attributes behavior mainly
to external, rather than internal forces. Hence, heroism and villainy are
unrelated to individual differences in personality or even conscious decisions
based on one’s values. This seems to imply a rather passive view of human
behavior in which people are largely at the mercy of circumstances outside
themselves, rather than rational actors capable of making choices. However, if
features of the person can be disregarded in favour of situational forces, then
it is very difficult to explain why it is that the <i>same situation </i>can elicit completely opposite responses from
different people. This would seem to suggest that situations elicit either
heroic or villainous responses in a random way that cannot be predicted, or
that situational factors alone are insufficient to explain the choices that
people make in difficult circumstances. An alternative view is that situations
do not so much suppress the individual personality, as reveal the person’s
latent potential (Krueger, 2008).
Therefore, a dangerous situation for example might reveal one person’s
potential for bravery and another’s potential for cowardice. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div style="background: white; margin: 0cm 0cm 18pt; text-align: center;">
<span style="line-height: 18px;"><b>Within you, without you: The incongruity within situationism</b></span></div>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 13.5pt; margin-bottom: 18.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
As I noted
earlier, most psychologists believe that both situational and personal factors
need to be considered in understanding why people behave the way they do.
Franco and Zimbardo actually acknowledge this in one of their <a href="http://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/the_banality_of_heroism" title="The Banality of Heroism">articles</a>: “Just
as in the Stanford Prison Experiment and the Milgram studies, the situation and
the personal characteristics of each person caught up in the situation interact
in unique ways.” When I first read this I thought it was a remarkable admission
considering that Zimbardo and his colleague Craig Haney responded with
hostility and dismissal (Haney & Zimbardo,
2009) to the suggestion that the results of the Stanford Prison
Experiment could have been influenced by the fact that people with certain
personality traits might have been more likely to volunteer for such an
experiment than others (Carnahan &
McFarland, 2007). Furthermore, it appears difficult at first to
reconcile an interactionist view with statements that Franco and Zimbardo have
made that that extreme behavior involving either heroism or evil is best
understood as a product of external circumstances and not of internal
dispositions. However, in practice, situationists
seem to offer a double standard when it comes to explaining evil versus heroic
behavior. Evil behavior is explained in terms of external situational and
systemic forces that compel otherwise “good” people to do bad things. Zimbardo <a href="http://talesfromthelou.wordpress.com/2013/03/07/philip-zimbardo-why-do-good-people-do-evil-things/" title="Philip Zimbardo: Why Do Good People Do Evil Things?">explains</a> that prisoner abuse is not due to a few “bad apples” but a
“bad barrel” that corrupts whatever is put into it. He even goes so far as to
say that “you can’t be a sweet cucumber in a vinegar barrel,” implying that
people in such circumstances are passive victims without any moral agency. On
the other hand, heroism is explained in terms of the “heroic imagination,”
something internal to the person that enables them to actively resist external
pressures to turn a blind eye to injustices. And such heroes can even emerge in
an “evil barrel” like Abu Ghraib. Hence, people respond to the <i>very</i> s<i>ame situation</i> in either good or evil ways. When some do evil, the
situation is blamed, yet when others do heroic deeds, at great risk to
themselves, it reflects the strength of their own character. This seems like a
very unbalanced view that appears to reflect ideological biases more than
objective analysis. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 13.5pt; margin-bottom: 18.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
In the
second part of this article, I will explore in more detail the situationist
analysis of evil and of heroism respectively, and will argue that a more
balanced view that takes into account personal responsibility and moral agency
is needed to understand these extremes of human behavior.</div>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 13.5pt; margin-bottom: 18.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
<b><i>Further Reading</i></b></div>
<div style="background: white; margin: 0cm 0cm 18pt;">
<span style="line-height: 18px;"><a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201405/challenging-the-banality-evil-and-heroism-part-2" target="_blank">Challenging the "Banality" of Evil and of Heroism - Part 2</a> Follow up to the present article. </span></div>
<hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" />
<div id="ftn1">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14.266666412353516px;"><b>Footnote </b></span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14.266666412353516px;">[1]</span></span></span> For the statistically minded, the average effect size of social influence was <i>r = .</i>13, compared to the effect size of personality which was <i>r = .</i>21. This was brought to my attention in a book review by Krueger (2008). </div>
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Please consider
following me on </span></i></b><a href="https://www.facebook.com/UniqueLikeEverybodyElse"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Facebook,</span></i></b></a> <a href="https://plus.google.com/b/116570783533948602312/116570783533948602312/posts"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Google Plus</span></i></b></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">, or </span></i></b><a href="https://twitter.com/ScottAMcGreal" target="_blank"><em><b><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">Twitter</span></b></em></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">© Scott McGreal. Please do not
reproduce without permission. Brief excerpts may be quoted as long as a link to
the original article is provided. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;"></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">This article also appears on Psychology Today on
my blog <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201404/challenging-the-banality-evil-and-heroism-part-1" target="_blank">Unique - Like Everybody Else</a>.</span><span style="color: red;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px;">
<em><strong>Image</strong> <strong>Credits</strong></em><em> </em></div>
<div style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px;">
The One Ring - courtesy of <a class="ext" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Unico_Anello.png" style="color: #333333;" target="_blank">Wikipedia Commons</a><span class="ext" style="background: url(http://assets.sussexpublishers.netdna-cdn.com/sites/all/modules/contrib/extlink/extlink.png) 100% 50% no-repeat; padding-right: 12px;"></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"></span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px;">
William Wallace portrait - courtesy of <a class="ext" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:William_Wallace.jpg" style="color: #333333;" target="_blank">Wikipedia Commons</a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>References <o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
<span class="Z3988" title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.jtitle=Personality+%26+social+psychology+bulletin&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F17440210&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fresearchblogging.org&rft.atitle=Revisiting+the+Stanford+prison+experiment%3A+could+participant+self-selection+have+led+to+the+cruelty%3F&rft.issn=0146-1672&rft.date=2007&rft.volume=33&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=603&rft.epage=14&rft.artnum=&rft.au=Carnahan+T&rft.au=McFarland+S&rfe_dat=bpr3.included=1;bpr3.tags=Psychology%2CPersonality%2C+Social+Psychology">Carnahan T, & McFarland S (2007). Revisiting the Stanford prison experiment: could participant self-selection have led to the cruelty? <span style="font-style: italic;">Personality & social psychology bulletin, 33</span> (5), 603-14 PMID: <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17440210" rev="review">17440210</a></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Haney, C., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2009). Persistent Dispositionalism in
Interactionist Clothing: Fundamental Attribution Error in Explaining Prison
Abuse. <i>Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 35</i>(6), 807-814. doi: 10.1177/0146167208322864<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Krueger, J. I. (2008). Lucifer's last laugh. <i>The American Journal of Psychology, 121</i>, 335-341. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Richard, F. D., Bond Jr, C. F., & Stokes-Zoota, J. J. (2003). One
Hundred Years of Social Psychology Quantitatively Described. <i>Review of General Psychology, 7</i>(4),
331-363. doi: 10.1037/1089-2680.7.4.331<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Zimbardo, P. G. (2007). <i>The
Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil</i> (1st ed.). New
York: Random House.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div>
<br />
<div id="ftn1">
</div>
</div>
Scott McGrealhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13757633582829269183noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2304269645366413372.post-3989444672051319432014-06-03T13:42:00.004+10:002014-06-03T13:45:28.028+10:00Blasphemous art and attitudes towards censorship: Examining an apparent double standard<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="float: left; padding: 5px;"><a href="http://www.researchblogging.org/"><img alt="ResearchBlogging.org" src="http://www.researchblogging.org/public/citation_icons/rb2_large_gray.png" style="border: 0;" /></a></span><br />
Blasphemy is a naturally controversial subject. In modern
Western countries there is a tension between the liberal democratic tradition
upholding the right to freedom of expression on the one hand and the desire not
to offend religious sensibilities on the other. This tension has been
highlighted in a number of high profile cases in recent years involving
artistic works that satirise images that are held sacred in various faiths.
Threats and assaults against artists who have criticised Islam in particular have
prompted debate about the limits of freedom of expression. Notable examples
include but are not limited to the fatwa against Salman Rushdie, the violent
responses to the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jyllands-Posten_Muhammad_cartoons_controversy" title="Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy">Jyllands-Posten Muhammad
cartoons</a>, <a href="http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/famous/theo_van_gogh/index.html">the
murder of Theo van Gogh</a>, attacks on Swedish artist <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lars_Vilks_Muhammad_drawings_controversy" title="Lars Vilks Muhammad drawings controversy">Lars Vilks</a>, and the
extraordinary worldwide response to the <i>Innocence
of Muslims </i>video clip (which I have previously <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/is-insulting-religion-extremism" title="Is Insulting Religion "Extremism"?">discussed</a>). A number
of recent events suggest that there appears to be a double standard operating
in the Western media regarding which religions it is acceptable to offend. I
find this particularly interesting considering the results of a recently
published study finding that non-religious people were more likely than
Christians to endorse a double standard regarding offending Muslims as opposed
to Christians with blasphemous artworks. Why this would be the case is not
entirely clear, although a number of possibilities deserve further exploration.
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In modern art there has long been a custom of artists using
shocking or disturbing images in order to provoke a response from viewers.
Artworks that depict sacred religious images in profane ways seem to elicit the
most controversy. Artists and their supporters defend such works on the grounds
of artistic freedom, while critics complain about the offense to deeply held
beliefs. A striking example is <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piss_Christ"><i>Piss Christ</i></a><i>, </i>a 1987
photograph by Andres Serrano depicting a crucifix immersed in what appears to
be the artist’s urine, which still provokes intense criticism today. Although
well received by art critics, the work has provoked death threats and physical
vandalism, while the Catholic Church in Australia attempted to prevent it from
being publicly exhibited in a national gallery in 1997. Artworks depicting
sacred Islamic images in a profane way seem to provoke even more extreme
reactions. For example, <i>Roundabout Dog, </i>a
drawing by Lars Vilks depicting Muhammad with the body of a dog, was refused
for entry in a public exhibition to which Vilks had been invited to contribute
for fear of violent reprisals. These fears were well founded as following
publication of the drawing in a newspaper editorial on freedom of expression
and the right to ridicule religious symbols, death threats were made against
the artist and the editor of the newspaper. An Islamic extremist group has even
offered a bounty of $150,000 for the murder of Vilks. Lars Vilks has since continued
to defend the importance of <a href="http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/0310/Lars-Vilks-why-some-European-artists-are-building-panic-rooms" title="Lars Vilks: why some European artists are building panic rooms">free
expression</a>, stating: “I'm actually not interested in offending the prophet.
The point is actually to show that you can. There is nothing so holy you can't
offend it.”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiTaBsqni17ergJ_pLte-otplsXrKcekxXaa14PvQWWyV86aXP0Oh5IE7D-1g46r1V0KFUOgjrCHI6w1SBYU-qxnYzUnAodTH6CXnIi8rclz-B1FiZXPcuNOiHdYafCsbWKDyISNFoUg5Q/s1600/Jesus+&+Mo+censored.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiTaBsqni17ergJ_pLte-otplsXrKcekxXaa14PvQWWyV86aXP0Oh5IE7D-1g46r1V0KFUOgjrCHI6w1SBYU-qxnYzUnAodTH6CXnIi8rclz-B1FiZXPcuNOiHdYafCsbWKDyISNFoUg5Q/s1600/Jesus+&+Mo+censored.jpg" height="320" width="304" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<i>Worth dying for? Channel Four broadcast this partially censored image</i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The question of whether freedom of expression, including
artistic expression, should be curbed in order to avoid offending religious
believers provokes a wide variety of responses, and a recent incident in
Britain is illustrative in this regard. A British political candidate named Maajid
Nawaz became the focus of <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jan/28/maajid-nawaz-muslim-lib-dem-candidate-cartoon" title="Maajid Nawaz defends decision to tweet controversial cartoon">controversy</a>
in January this year after tweeting a cartoon depicting Jesus and Muhammad
(from the web based series “<a href="http://www.jesusandmo.net/">Jesus and Mo</a>”)
– ironically to demonstrate that as a <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/28/speaking-islam-loudmouths-hijacked" title="Why I'm speaking up for Islam against the loudmouths who have hijacked it">moderate
tolerant Muslim</a> he did not consider such<span style="background: white; color: #333333; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"> </span>images to be particularly blasphemous or offensive,
and that the media should not bow to pressure to censor them. Predictably, he
has received <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/25/liberal-democrats-t-shirt-jesus-muhammad-religion" title="The Liberal Democrats face a true test of liberty">death threats</a>,
presumably from those with less moderate views on the subject. Additionally, a
petition calling for his dismissal as a parliamentary candidate was started,
although the leader of his party has supported Mr Nawaz’s right to express his
views. What I found most interesting though was the way the media has chosen to
report the incident. The BBC and the national press have apparently refused to
show the image at the heart of this controversy at all, even though reporting
news is supposed to be their job.<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%; mso-ansi-language: EN-AU; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">[1]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span>
Britain’s Channel 4 decided to compromise by showing a partially censored image
in which the face of Jesus remains visible but the face of Muhammad is
completely obscured by a black oval. The response of one journalist, <a href="http://nickcohen.net/2014/02/15/twenty-five-years-on-from-rushdie-we-are-frightened-to-say-we-are-scared/" title="Twenty five years on from Rushdie we are too frightened to say we are scared">Nick
Cohen</a>, to this is that it seems that if Christians are offended by the
cartoon they are expected to take it on the chin, but the network will not dare
take the risk of offending Muslim extremists. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The decision by Channel 4 to engage in this partial
censorship is paralleled by the results of a recently published paper (Dunkel & Hillard, 2013) that examined
people’s attitudes to artworks that desecrate sacred images in Christianity and
Islam respectively. One of the studies reported in the paper asked American
participants to complete a questionnaire on their “Views on controversial art”.
The questionnaire had two versions, so that with a simple change of wording
participants could be asked about their views on art that offends either
Christians or Muslims respectively. Sample items include, “Art that upsets <i>Christians/Muslims </i>should not be made
because it is insensitive to their religion,” and for the opposite view,
“People have a right to produce art that insults <i>Christians/Muslims</i>.” Participants were also asked their religious
affiliation and their degree of acceptance of Christian beliefs. In this
particular sample, participants happened to be either Christians or
non-religious; no other religions were represented. One of the findings was
that people with Christian beliefs were equally as willing to censor art that
offended Muslims as well as art that offended Christians. Perhaps this
indicates that Christians tend to feel that sacred images in general should be
respected even if they derive from non-Christians religions. However, what I
found more intriguing was the result for non-religious participants. These
indicated that compared to Christians they were much less willing to censor art
offensive to Christians, but they were equally as willing as Christians to
censor art that offended Muslims. This seems like a very inconsistent stance to
take and the reasons for it are not clear, although a number of explanations
come to mind. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi7rSABNLXXduefaHDnNNntnM009HVPxxXVpj31lqLTF9EW0lmVA2oqnRlJ_RS7XlZQYBtCzNrbsh65rMXz7nmbnfooSqzEyJcWafQNY0VwwUdDXNvUE4GW1rlPZ6wTFd5diVcjLxvUcr4/s1600/Piss_Christ_by_Serrano_Andres_%25281987%2529.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi7rSABNLXXduefaHDnNNntnM009HVPxxXVpj31lqLTF9EW0lmVA2oqnRlJ_RS7XlZQYBtCzNrbsh65rMXz7nmbnfooSqzEyJcWafQNY0VwwUdDXNvUE4GW1rlPZ6wTFd5diVcjLxvUcr4/s1600/Piss_Christ_by_Serrano_Andres_%25281987%2529.jpg" height="320" width="227" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
Piss Christ<i> by </i><span style="background-color: white; color: #252525; font-style: italic; line-height: 22.399999618530273px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Andres Serrano. Is it alright for people who are offended by images like this to try to prevent it from being exhibited? </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The authors discussed the possibility that non-Christians,
who are a minority group in the USA, might have different attitudes to
Christianity, the mainstream religion, compared to Islam, a minority religion.
Non-religious people might be antagonistic to mainstream religion perhaps
because they feel that their rights as a minority group need to be protected,
and hence they wish to protect their right to criticise Christianity. On the
other hand, the non-religious might feel more sympathy to society’s other
religious minorities, even if they do not share their beliefs. Some tentative
evidence in support of this view is indicated by the fact that some members of
the political left-wing, which traditionally has a secular orientation, <a href="http://www.onelawforall.org.uk/siding-with-the-oppressor-the-pro-islamist-left/" title="Siding with the Oppressor: The Pro-Islamist Left">have allied with
Islamist groups</a>, in spite of the latter’s right-wing values, in the name of
multiculturalism. (Something which is strongly criticised by other members of
the left though, such as <a href="http://www.secularism.org.uk/blog/2013/06/multiculturalism-and-cultural-relativism" title="Multiculturalism and Cultural Relativism">Maryam Namazie</a>, as a step
backwards.) If it is true that non-religious people tend to see Muslims as a
potential political ally against mainstream Christians, then supporting
censorship of anti-Muslim art for this reason might be a futile endeavour. The
results of the study by Dunkel and Hillard indicate that Christians support
such censorship to the same degree, so Muslims would have little to gain from
an alliance with the non-religious in that respect. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Another possibility is that non-religious people are
particularly responsive to intellectual fashions current in modern Western
culture. There is a trend for non-religious people to be somewhat more <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201401/more-knowledge-less-belief-in-religion" title="More Knowledge, Less Belief in Religion?">intelligent</a> than religious
people, and it has been argued that highly intelligent people are better at
detecting and espousing the values that are normative at a particular time (Woodley, 2010).<span style="color: #333333; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"> </span>Multiculturalism
has become politically fashionable in Western countries in recent years and
perhaps willingness to censor anti-Islamic art reflects a liberal concern to
uphold respect for “cultural diversity.” Personally, I think this would also be
an unfortunate stance for intelligent people to take as radical Islamists do
not reciprocate the same respect and tolerance and if allowed to have their way
would impose their own values on others. The study by Dunkel and Hillard did
not assess participants’ political views or their attitudes towards
multiculturalism, so further research measuring these would help determine if
inconsistent attitudes towards censorship are related to such social and
political concerns. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
On the other hand, inconsistent attitudes to censorship
appear to exist in countries that are much more secular than the USA, such as
those in Western Europe and Australia. Even though Western European countries
are generally nominally Christian, surveys have found that belief in
Christianity has considerably declined in recent decades. As a result,
non-religious people do not have the same kind of minority status they have in
the USA. In spite of increased secularization, there has been a trend in recent
years to stifle freedom of speech in order to prevent offense to religious people.
There have been a number of well-publicised cases in Europe of people actually
being prosecuted for criticising Islam in particular (see this <a href="http://www.legal-project.org/issues/european-hate-speech-laws" title="European Hate Speech Laws">site</a> for examples). An example of a
double standard protecting Islam occurred in Australia in 2013 when a <a href="http://www.woroni.com.au/comment/from-back-page-to-front-page-advice-from-the-anu/" title="From Back Page to Front Page: ‘Advice’ from the ANU">student newspaper</a>
ran a series of satirical infographics criticising Catholicism, Scientology,
Mormonism, Judaism, and Islam respectively. Even though the first four articles
were published without any controversy, when the article satirising Islam was
published the newspaper staff were forced to remove it by university
administrators, who cited concerns that the piece might pose a threat to the
reputation and security of the university. What these cases seem to indicate is
that even in largely secular countries there appears to be an attitude that
offending Muslims is much less acceptable than offending Christians.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Many people, including myself, have become concerned that an
attitude of fear has become prevalent in Western countries in response to multiple
violent incidents involving Muslim extremists seeking to punish anyone who
dares to publish any material they deem disrespectful of Islam. An increasingly
common response by secular authorities to this fear has been to placate
extremists and to chastise anyone who feels bold enough to provoke them.
Perhaps this has seeped into the thinking of even non-religious people who
would not otherwise be inclined to grant respect to “sacred” figures in whom
they do not actually believe. Hence, non-religious people might understandably
feel that at the present time satirising Christianity is a safer way to express
their lack of respect for religion compared to satirising Islam, which is
accompanied by a much higher risk. If correct, this is a very unfortunate situation,
as it sends violent religious bullies the message that standover tactics will
be effective in silencing their critics. It is also an erosion of a fundamental
right at the heart of Western civilisation in the name of placating people who
have no respect for Western values of tolerance and freedom. Dunkel and
Hillard’s study did not examine whether fear actually does play a role in the
thinking of those who would support censorship, so further research would help
determine if this is correct.<span style="color: #333333; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Another limitation of Dunkel and Hillard’s study is that it
used a rather small sample of non-religious people from a single country.
Larger samples drawn from other more secular countries such as those in Western
Europe would help determine how broadly their results can be generalised.
Additionally, “non-religious” people are not homogenous, so it would be helpful
to have more fine grained information about what views these people have about
religion and about art. That is, non-religious people have a <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201309/dogmatism-and-openness-experience-in-the-non-religious" title="Dogmatism and Openness to Experience in the Non-Religious">wide array of
attitudes</a> towards religions, including indifference, hostility, even
sympathy, and it seems likely that these different attitudes would be
associated with differing views on censorship of “blasphemous” art. Many
non-religious people, including famous atheists such as <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kj2QECABRVs" title="Greg Gutfeld Calls Out Liberal 'Double Standard' On Richard Dawkins' Controversial Islam Tweets">Richard
Dawkins</a> and <a href="http://www.samharris.org/site/full_text/the-end-of-liberalism/l" title="The End of Liberalism?">Sam Harris</a>, are quite outspoken about the
importance of free expression and the right to <a href="http://www.atheistrev.com/2012/09/condemn-violence-defend-religious.html" title="Condemn Violence, Defend Religious Criticism">criticise Islam</a> in
particular. Further research would be needed to identify what characteristics
distinguish those who consistently reject all censorship from those who support
a double standard. <o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div>
<!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><br clear="all" />
<hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" />
<!--[endif]-->
<br />
<div id="ftn1">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<b><i>Footnote</i></b><br />
<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%; mso-ansi-language: EN-AU; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">[1]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span> Further examples of the
BBC’s reluctance to say or do anything that might upset Muslims in any way,
even if this means censoring the news, are discussed <a href="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2013/08/12/no-matter-what-atrocities-islamists-commit-the-bbc-responds-with-blind-spasms-of-respect/" title="No Matter What Atrocities Islamists Commit, the BBC Responds With Blind Spasms of ‘Respect’">here</a>. <o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14.266666412353516px;">Please consider following me on </span></i></b><a href="https://www.facebook.com/UniqueLikeEverybodyElse"><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14.266666412353516px;">Facebook,</span></i></a> <a href="https://plus.google.com/b/116570783533948602312/116570783533948602312/posts"><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14.266666412353516px;">Google Plus</span></i></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14.266666412353516px;">, or </span></i></b><a href="https://twitter.com/ScottAMcGreal" target="_blank"><em><b><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14.266666412353516px; text-decoration: none;">Twitter</span></b></em></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14.266666412353516px;">.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14.266666412353516px;"><br /></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14.266666412353516px;">© Scott McGreal. Please do not reproduce without permission. Brief excerpts may be quoted as long as a link to the original article is provided. </span> <span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14.266666412353516px;"><o:p></o:p></span><br />
<br />
<span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14.266666412353516px;">This article also appears on Psychology Today on my blog<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #771100; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14.266666412353516px; text-decoration: none;"><a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201403/who-supports-censorship-blasphemous-art" style="background-color: white; color: #771100; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 20.790000915527344px; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank" title="Facebook Usage and Easy Acceptance of Racism">Unique - Like Everybody Else.</a> </span></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i>Further reading<o:p></o:p></i></b></div>
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/is-insulting-religion-extremism" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Is
Insulting Religion "Extremism"?</span></a><span class="MsoHyperlink"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"> <o:p></o:p></span></span><br />
<span style="background: white;">My views on how people choose to respond to
provocative religious insults. </span><u><span style="color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></u><br />
<span style="background: white;"><br /></span>
<a href="http://www.pewforum.org/2012/11/21/laws-penalizing-blasphemy-apostasy-and-defamation-of-religion-are-widespread/" title="Laws Penalizing Blasphemy, Apostasy and Defamation of Religion are Widespread"><span style="background: white;">Pew Research report on Blasphemy, Apostasy, and
Defamation of religion laws around the world. </span></a><span style="background: white;"> <o:p></o:p></span><br />
<span style="background: white;"><br /></span>
<i><span style="background: white;">Criticism
of blasphemy laws and support for freedom of speech:<o:p></o:p></span></i><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-outline-level: 1;">
<a href="http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/on-the-freedom-to-offend-an-imaginary-god"><span style="line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">On the Freedom to Offend an
Imaginary God</span></a><span style="color: #333333; line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU; mso-font-kerning: 18.0pt;"> by Sam Harris<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-outline-level: 1;">
<a href="http://www.michaelnugent.com/2012/09/24/absurd-and-dangerous-eu-and-oic-say-we-must-respect-all-religious-prophets/"><span style="line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">Absurd and dangerous: EU and
OIC say we must respect all religious prophets</span></a><span style="color: #333333; line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU; mso-font-kerning: 18.0pt;"> by Michael Nugent<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Pair of articles by PT blogger Gad Saad:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-outline-level: 1;">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/homo-consumericus/201112/blasphemy-laws-belong-in-the-dark-ages"><span style="line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">Blasphemy Laws Belong in the
Dark Ages</span></a><span style="color: #333333; line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU; mso-font-kerning: 18.0pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<h1 style="background: white; line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/homo-consumericus/201209/masturbating-crucifix-in-film-no-riots" title="Freedom of speech = bedrock of the civilized world"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal; line-height: 150%;">Masturbating With a Crucifix in a
Film… No Riots?</span></a><span style="color: #333333; font-size: 12.0pt; font-weight: normal; line-height: 150%;"> <o:p></o:p></span></h1>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Please consider
following me on </span></i></b><a href="https://www.facebook.com/UniqueLikeEverybodyElse"><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Facebook,</span></i></a> <a href="https://plus.google.com/b/116570783533948602312/116570783533948602312/posts"><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Google Plus</span></i></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">, or </span></i></b><a href="https://twitter.com/ScottAMcGreal" target="_blank"><em><b><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">Twitter</span></b></em></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">© Scott McGreal. Please do not
reproduce without permission. Brief excerpts may be quoted as long as a link to
the original article is provided. </span> <span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><o:p></o:p></span><br />
<br />
<span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14.266666412353516px;">This article also appears on Psychology Today on my blog<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201403/who-supports-censorship-blasphemous-art" style="background-color: white; color: #771100; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 20.790000915527344px; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank" title="Facebook Usage and Easy Acceptance of Racism"><span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14.266666412353516px;">Unique - Like Everybody Else.</span></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>References <o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
<span class="Z3988" title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.jtitle=The+Journal+of+psychology&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F24617268&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fresearchblogging.org&rft.atitle=Blasphemy+or+art%3A+what+art+should+be+censored+and+who+wants+to+censor+it%3F&rft.issn=0022-3980&rft.date=2014&rft.volume=148&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=21&rft.artnum=&rft.au=Dunkel+CS&rft.au=Hillard+EE&rfe_dat=bpr3.included=1;bpr3.tags=Psychology%2CBlasphemy%2C+Controversial+Art%2C+Social+Psychology">Dunkel CS, & Hillard EE (2014). Blasphemy or art: what art should be censored and who wants to censor it? <span style="font-style: italic;">The Journal of psychology, 148</span> (1), 1-21 PMID: <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24617268" rev="review">24617268</a></span></div>
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Woodley, M. A. (2010). Are high-IQ individuals deficient in
common sense? A critical examination of the ‘clever sillies’ hypothesis. <i>Intelligence, 38</i>(5), 471-480. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2010.06.002<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
</div>
Scott McGrealhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13757633582829269183noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2304269645366413372.post-54834276590404351062014-05-14T14:02:00.002+10:002014-05-14T14:11:36.128+10:00Facebook as a conduit for misinformation and racism: The role of shallow information processing<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="float: left; padding: 5px;"><a href="http://www.researchblogging.org/"><img alt="ResearchBlogging.org" src="http://www.researchblogging.org/public/citation_icons/rb2_large_gray.png" style="border: 0;" /></a></span><br />
In a previous <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/is-there-something-wrong-people-who-do-not-use-facebook">post</a>,
I discussed how there seems to be a trend today to regard having a Facebook
account as a sort of quick and dirty indicator of normal social adjustment, and
that <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2184658/Is-joining-Facebook-sign-youre-psychopath-Some-employers-psychologists-say-suspicious.html">some
employers</a> – very unfairly – regard people who choose not to use the site as
somehow “suspicious.” I noted that such a view is unfounded and also pointed out
that Facebook usage can be problematic for some people under some
circumstances. In fact, some research suggests that Facebook is associated with
a culture of shallow information processing that might facilitate uncritical
acceptance of problematic social attitudes, such as racism. One study in
particular found that people who spend a great deal of time on Facebook are
more likely to agree with racist messages posted by another user compared to
people who spend less time on the site. This raises the possibility that
Facebook might be a particularly apt medium for spreading poor quality
information generally. Whether this is because Facebook usage actually degrades
the quality of a person’s information processing capacities or because
individuals who are prone to shallow information processing have a high
preference for using this medium remains unclear. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
With the growth in popularity of Facebook, a great deal of
research has examined the motives and characteristics of users. People mainly
use Facebook to connect with others, although many people also use it
secondarily to share news and information. One study found that people who
preferred using Facebook, compared to those who preferred using Twitter, were
more sociable and more neurotic, but had a lower need for cognition (Hughes, Rowe, Batey, & Lee, 2012). Need
for cognition refers to a person’s desire for intellectual stimulation and
enjoyment of effortful thinking. A lower need for cognition would suggest that
people with a stronger preference Facebook do not generally desire to think too
deeply about the information they encounter online, whereas Twitter users may
be more critical thinkers. In addition to lack of critical thinking, the need
to feel a sense of belonging, a common motive for Facebook usage, may mean that
frequent Facebook users may agree more or less indiscriminately with messages
they encounter online compared to less frequent users (Rauch & Schanz, 2013). <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Social media allows people to opine about any subject they
like, including topics that are generally regarded as being of low social
acceptability. As a result, people with racist views take the opportunity to
express negative opinions about different ethnic groups, and racist memes and
rants on Facebook are not uncommon. Some racist messages argue for the
superiority of, say, white people over other races. However, a more subtle for
of racism argues that whites are victims of discrimination by minority groups.
Victim based racist arguments seem to have wider appeal than ones based on
blatant superiority and are less likely to be immediately rejected. As a
result, extremist groups frequently portray themselves as victims of oppression
in order to elicit fear and anger at the supposed injustices inflicted upon
them by an unfair society. A recent study therefore looked at whether a
person’s frequency of Facebook usage and their motivation to seek information
was associated with more agreement with racist messages read online (Rauch & Schanz, 2013). This was tested in
an experiment in which participants read one of three messages: an egalitarian,
anti-racist message; a message of white superiority over blacks; or a message
portraying whites as victims. Participants were asked how much they agreed with
each message, and how they might respond to it, e.g. whether they would share
it with others, or if they would either friend or unfriend the author of the
message. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjpDCvohEYr6quHj9HTL6Ow9H77n2ZJTq3zrgRgdDSXrv1q6pYesB3QmgAxzzsCxBqrewvPl0WJBQ22LhvtpAZw177vs70egvIaXENhmt354hWJR1-qDFvT7pEgqZkhZf7e5jtXB1lzIoI/s1600/2756_gallery.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjpDCvohEYr6quHj9HTL6Ow9H77n2ZJTq3zrgRgdDSXrv1q6pYesB3QmgAxzzsCxBqrewvPl0WJBQ22LhvtpAZw177vs70egvIaXENhmt354hWJR1-qDFvT7pEgqZkhZf7e5jtXB1lzIoI/s1600/2756_gallery.jpg" height="301" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 11px; text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><i>Racist poster displayed on the Facebook page of the Republican National Committee for nearly a week</i></span></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
On the whole, people were more likely to agree with the
egalitarian message than either of the racist ones, although people tended to
be somewhat more sympathetic to the victim message than the superiority one.
People’s behavioural intentions to the egalitarian and victim messages did not
differ, although they generally had a more negative response to the superiority
message. However, there were noticeable differences between high and low
frequency users. The more frequently a person used Facebook, the more likely
they were to agree with each of the racist messages, particularly the
superiority one. High frequency users were also more likely to act on either of
the racist messages compared to less frequent users. There were also
differences between those who were strongly motivated to seek information
compared to those with less of this motivation. High information seekers had a
more positive attitude to the egalitarian message and more negative attitudes
to the racist messages than low information seekers. High information seekers
were also more likely to act on the egalitarian message than the low
information seekers. This seems to suggest that Facebook users with higher
information seeking motives may process information more critically than those
with lower information seeking motives. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The results of this study suggest that high frequency
Facebook users and those with low information seeking motives appear to be
rather undiscriminating in how they respond to online communications, as they
had reasonably similar responses to both racist and anti-racist messages,
almost as if they were agreeing blindly. On the other hand, less frequent users
and those with high information seeking motives showed more clearly
differentiated responses to each message, suggesting they gave more thought to
their responses. A striking feature of these results is that the messages that
participants read originated from a stranger, yet certain users readily agreed
with their views. It seems likely that messages from friends would be even more
persuasive, considering that most Facebook users seem to be motivated by a need
to belong. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The reasons these results occurred are not completely clear.
One possibility is that people who choose to spend a lot of time on Facebook
and/or who are not motivated by information seeking have personal
characteristics, such as low need for cognition, that predispose them to agree
uncritically with messages they read online. On the other hand, it is also
possible that engaging in high levels of Facebook usage could degrade a
person’s capacity to think critically, perhaps due to something about the
nature of the activity itself. Further research could help make the causes of
this effect clearer. For example, experiments could be conducted where people
are asked to use Facebook for long periods of time and then tested to see if
this has any effect on their ability to think critically compared to
alternative activities, such as using other websites. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The study also raises an issue about whether Facebook is a
particularly apt medium for transmitting misinformation in general.
Misinformation is very common on the internet and many hoaxes have been widely
believed and circulated via the web. Future studies could compare whether
Facebook users are more susceptible to misinformation than users of other
media. For example, an experiment could be done in which people are exposed to
misinformation on either Facebook or Twitter and then see how users of each
site respond, perhaps after a substantial delay when they have had enough time
to process the information. For example, participants might be retested after a
few days to determine if they still believe the information and if they have
made any attempt to check it with independent sources. If it is true that users
of Twitter for example are more critical thinkers than Facebook users, then
they might be expected to be more sceptical about what they believe. This would
help determine if frequent Facebook users actually are less discriminating in
what they accept compared to other people, or if they are not much different
from internet users generally. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj5bj1PlKip6sKh-6GaSmTio6wQt-KgaaQdLsjp1bRW_EhFU33ATZMJJen_6eXhWt_eOAmPJgBRzXlaUDzLwGhjUJAmymQTiGtJxXH476lX-kKTMQhN2nanmM4D_vJGxkmWCQAg2GeikRo/s1600/facebook+misinfo.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj5bj1PlKip6sKh-6GaSmTio6wQt-KgaaQdLsjp1bRW_EhFU33ATZMJJen_6eXhWt_eOAmPJgBRzXlaUDzLwGhjUJAmymQTiGtJxXH476lX-kKTMQhN2nanmM4D_vJGxkmWCQAg2GeikRo/s1600/facebook+misinfo.jpg" height="312" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
The study by Rauch and Schanz is one of several indicating
that in some people at least Facebook usage can be problematic, much like other
activities that people might engage in to excess. I think this shows that using
something as simple as whether or not someone has a Facebook account is a sign
of how “normal” they are is both foolish and very unfair. Treating Facebook
usage as a shorthand indicator of “normality” is little more than a lazy way of
sorting people into categories with as little effort as possible, and is itself
a sign of uncritical thinking. In the spirit of fairness, I want to also point
out that the results of studies such as the ones I have cited indicate general
trends only and do not necessarily imply that all people who spend a lot of
time on Facebook have problems, only some of them. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Please consider
following me on </span></i></b><a href="https://www.facebook.com/UniqueLikeEverybodyElse"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Facebook,</span></i></b></a> <a href="https://plus.google.com/b/116570783533948602312/116570783533948602312/posts"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Google Plus</span></i></b></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">, or </span></i></b><a href="https://twitter.com/ScottAMcGreal"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Twitter</span></i></b></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">© Scott McGreal. Please do not
reproduce without permission. Brief excerpts may be quoted as long as a link to
the original article is provided. </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;"></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">This article also appears on
Psychology Today on my blog<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201312/facebook-usage-and-easy-acceptance-racism" target="_blank" title="Facebook Usage and Easy Acceptance of Racism"><span style="color: #771100; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Unique - Like Everybody Else.</span></a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 15.0pt;">
<strong><span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 10.5pt;">Other posts about Social
Media</span></strong><span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 10.5pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201301/twitter-and-mortality-tweet-or-not-tweet">Twitter and Mortality: To Tweet or Not to Tweet?</a><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Extroverts but not introverts use
Twitter to ward off existential anxiety</span><span style="color: #666666; font-family: Arial, sans-serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #666666; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 15.0pt;">
<span style="color: black;"><a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201303/the-misunderstood-personality-profile-wikipedia-members" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">The Misunderstood Personality Profile of Wikipedia Members</span></a><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> Contrary
to a widely reported study, Wikipedians are not close-minded at all. </span></span><span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 10.5pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 15.0pt;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 10.5pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i>Image Credits<o:p></o:p></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-outline-level: 1;">
<a href="http://www.mizozo.com/world/10/2009/28/rnc-s-facebook-page-displays-racist-photos-for-nea....html">RNC's Facebook Page
Displays Racist Photos For Nearly a Week</a><span style="color: #222222; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU; mso-font-kerning: 18.0pt;"> MizOzo.com<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-outline-level: 1;">
<span style="color: #222222; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU; mso-font-kerning: 18.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-outline-level: 1;">
<span style="color: #222222; line-height: 107%;">"<a href="http://www.pinterest.com/pin/263671753158772825/">Dumbing down of
humanity</a>" from <a href="http://thebloggess.com/" title="The Bloggess">Jennifer
Lawson's</a> <a href="http://www.pinterest.com/thebloggess/kick-ass-stuff/" title="Kick-Ass stuff">Pinterest page</a></span><span style="color: #222222; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU; mso-font-kerning: 18.0pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>References <o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Hughes, D. J., Rowe, M., Batey, M., & Lee, A. (2012). A tale of two
sites: Twitter vs. Facebook and the personality predictors of social media
usage. <i>Computers in Human Behavior, 28</i>(2),
561-569. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2011.11.001<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
<span class="Z3988" title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.jtitle=Computers+in+Human+Behavior&rft_id=info%3A%2F&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fresearchblogging.org&rft.atitle=Advancing+racism+with+Facebook%3A+Frequency+and+purpose+of+Facebook+use+and+the+acceptance+of+prejudiced+and+egalitarian+messages&rft.issn=&rft.date=2013&rft.volume=29&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=610&rft.epage=615&rft.artnum=&rft.au=Rauch%2C+S.+M.&rft.au=Schanz%2C+K.&rfe_dat=bpr3.included=1;bpr3.tags=Psychology%2CPersonality%2C+Intelligence%2C+social+networking">Rauch, S. M., & Schanz, K. (2013). Advancing racism with Facebook: Frequency and purpose of Facebook use and the acceptance of prejudiced and egalitarian messages <span style="font-style: italic;">Computers in Human Behavior, 29</span> (3), 610-615</span></div>
Scott McGrealhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13757633582829269183noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2304269645366413372.post-10996654324088669182014-04-10T14:18:00.000+10:002014-08-15T00:00:07.848+10:00Atheists and Their Capacity for Awe at Life<span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="line-height: 17.1200008392334px;"><span style="float: left; padding: 5px;"><a href="http://www.researchblogging.org/"><img alt="ResearchBlogging.org" src="http://www.researchblogging.org/public/citation_icons/rb2_large_gray.png" style="border: 0;" /></a></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;">The emotion of awe is a self-transcendent one, in the sense that the experience of awe entails a feeling of being confronted with something much greater than oneself. Many people think of awe as a particularly religious emotion and therefore seem to assume that people with no religious beliefs at all, e.g. atheists are closed to the experience of awe. This assumption is quite false and reflects a wider prejudice against atheists. An illustrative example of this particular prejudice occurred when Oprah Winfrey told endurance swimmer Diana Nyad that she could not be an atheist, even though Nyad said she was, because Nyad stated that she is “in awe” of life. Research has shown that people who reject supernatural beliefs actually are capable of experiencing a sense of awe. In fact, the experience of awe may be particularly beneficial for those who do not believe in an afterlife.<br />
<br />
</span><br />
<div>
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;">Diana Nyad seems like a pretty awesome person. She set a <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2013/09/02/world/americas/diana-nyad-cuba-florida-swim/index.html" title="'Never, ever give up:' Diana Nyad completes historic Cuba-to-Florida swim">world first</a> by swimming from Cuba to Florida without a protective cage on her fifth attempt to do so. In what turned out to be an <a href="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2013/10/14/oprah-winfreys-awkward-conversation-with-marathon-swimmer-diana-nyad-an-atheist-whos-in-awe/" title="Oprah Winfrey’s Awkward Conversation with Marathon Swimmer Diana Nyad, an ‘Atheist Who’s in Awe’">awkward interview</a> with Oprah Winfrey, Nyad described herself as “an atheist who’s in awe.” She talked of how deeply moved she is by the beauty of the universe, and all of humanity, “all the billions of people who have lived before us, who have loved, and hurt and suffered.” Oprah’s rather brusque response was that she did not consider Nyad to be an atheist then, because “if you believe in the awe, and the wonder, and the mystery” then “that is what God is!”</span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;"><br />
</span> <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;">Naturally, many people who do consider themselves atheists felt rather <a href="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2013/10/16/boston-atheists-tell-oprah-to-stop-relabeling-atheists/" title="Boston Atheists Tell Oprah to Stop Relabeling Atheists">insulted</a> by Oprah’s comments, implying as they do that <i>real </i>atheists are not actually capable of feeling a sense of awe at the wonder and mystery of life. Either that, or they are not really atheists. While some people may well use the word “God” purely as a metaphor for “awe, wonder, and mystery,” most people understand the term differently, more often than not to refer to the existence of a supernatural creator being, so Oprah’s claims are disingenuous. <o:p></o:p></span><br />
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;"><br />
</span> <br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgGrA6KZzgb-StEsTkqO4IliNJnZRXcdSgR0AnWwGCwzTwPUiNp1Y8sdF9QtRuAyAkr7SLBC3N20m-uoaTmaEz8xL4tvwdXLNFKqmQPQOeQ3WOIaaM6FdQH4ie4qdfuGTXahu_500BlwLY/s1600/oprah-3+(1).jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgGrA6KZzgb-StEsTkqO4IliNJnZRXcdSgR0AnWwGCwzTwPUiNp1Y8sdF9QtRuAyAkr7SLBC3N20m-uoaTmaEz8xL4tvwdXLNFKqmQPQOeQ3WOIaaM6FdQH4ie4qdfuGTXahu_500BlwLY/s1600/oprah-3+(1).jpg" height="640" width="404" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><div style="font-size: medium;">
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 11px; text-align: start;"><i>Atheists have objected to Oprah's attempts to relabel them</i></span></div>
<div style="font-size: medium;">
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 11px; text-align: start;"><i><br />
</i></span></div>
</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;">Oprah’s remarks are indicative of a widespread social stigma associated with atheism, particularly in the United States. According to a survey of how Americans view minority groups, atheists <a href="http://atheism.about.com/b/2006/03/24/atheists-hated-more-than-gays-muslims-all-other-groups.htm" title="Atheists Hated More than Gays, Muslims, All Other Groups">top the list</a> of people that Americans have a problem with, more so than Muslims or gays. In fact, a 2002 survey found that 54% of Americans have an unfavorable opinion of atheists (Zuckerman, 2009). Psalm 14 in the Bible describes people who don’t believe in God as “filthy, corrupt fools, entirely incapable of doing any good” (Zuckerman, 2009). So perhaps Oprah thought she was being kind to Nyad by trying to deny that she was “really” an atheist? In spite of these negative stereotypes, research actually presents a more favourable portrait of what atheists are like, finding that compared to most religious people they tend to be generally less prejudiced and to have more <a href="http://epiphenom.fieldofscience.com/2010/07/what-values-motivate-non-religious-in.html" title="What values motivate the non-religious in the UK?">universally inclusive values</a>, e.g. atheists tend to be less racist and sexist, less anti-Semitic, less nationalistic, less dogmatic, and less authoritarian.<o:p></o:p></span><br />
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;"><br />
</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;">Oprah’s statement more specifically reflects a stereotype of atheists as cynical, joyless, and lacking the capacity for awe in particular (Caldwell-Harris, Wilson, LoTempio, & Beit-Hallahmi, 2011). Quite the contrary, in response to a survey question asking if one had “ever felt wonderment or felt as if you were part of something greater than yourself,” 73% of atheists said yes. When asked what provoked these feelings, the majority (54%) said “nature”; the next most popular answers were “science” (29%), music/art (12%) and “human cooperation” (8%). The survey also found that contrary to popular beliefs that atheists are alienated and unhappy, atheists did not differ from Christians or Buddhists on measures of sociality, joviality, emotional stability, and happiness. Clearly people who do not believe in a supernatural creator being are as much capable of experiencing awe as people who do. This is just as well, because awe can have a beneficial effect on subjective well-being for reasons that may be of particular relevance to people who do not believe in a supernatural realm. <o:p></o:p></span><br />
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;"><br />
</span> <br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEidXW0zMVHorpM-q6F71mhq_bsGLf2H9OHelQwQriCWVwLG7jAJL2ysDuogi96vYFvy0RUa9NwtcHjmXaKbXZaWWvCOvwiITtF1Y9s65MEj0lIwL0FKulHUVqWflP02iJVX61KLbNgH-E4/s1600/awesome+atheist+poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEidXW0zMVHorpM-q6F71mhq_bsGLf2H9OHelQwQriCWVwLG7jAJL2ysDuogi96vYFvy0RUa9NwtcHjmXaKbXZaWWvCOvwiITtF1Y9s65MEj0lIwL0FKulHUVqWflP02iJVX61KLbNgH-E4/s1600/awesome+atheist+poster.jpg" height="305" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;"><br />
</span></div>
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;"><br />
</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;">Researchers who have studied the experience of awe have defined it as a response to the experience of vastness combined with a need to make sense of an experience so vast it surpasses one’s current understanding (Keltner & Haidt, 2003). Vastness implies something that is perceived as immense, e.g. in regards to size, scope, number, or even social bearing (e.g. a powerful leader). When this happens, a person may feel overwhelmed and therefore be motivated to acquire new knowledge to accommodate such an awe-inspiring experience into their world-view. According to a series of research studies, one of the consequences of experiencing a sense of awe is that one’s perception of time is expanded, almost as if one feels that time is standing still (Rudd, Vohs, & Aaker, 2012). This is in contrast to the feeling that one does not have enough time, a great source of mental stress for many people. Hence, experiencing awe can induce a feeling that one does have plenty of time, and a sense of savouring one’s momentary experiences more deeply. Rudd, Vohs and Aaker found that it was possible to experimentally induce feelings of awe in people (e.g. by reading a story about ascending the Eiffel Tower and seeing Paris from on high) and that doing so produced not only a feeling of expanded time, but an increase in momentary satisfaction with life. <o:p></o:p></span><br />
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;"><br />
</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;">I think the connections between the sense of awe, feelings of expanded time, and increased satisfaction in the moment are particularly relevant to people who do not believe that consciousness continues after death. To many people, the belief that death is not the end is a source of undeniable comfort. On the other hand, some philosophers have argued that knowing that one’s life has a finite duration provides an incentive to cherish the time that one has available. Contemplating the billions of people who have ever lived, as Diana Nyad speaks of, might not only produce a powerful feeling of awe, but an expanded perception of one’s own time on earth. This may in turn create a deepened sense of contentment with one’s own allotted span, which may help alleviate the sense of existential dread some people experience when contemplating their own mortality. I think testing the effects of inducing feelings of awe on a person’s attitudes to their own mortality would make an interesting research study. <o:p></o:p></span><br />
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;"><br />
</span> <br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/JXEiKPxCSdA?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;"><i>Christopher Hitchens provides an articulate explanation of his sense of awe at the natural universe</i></span></div>
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;">Perhaps Oprah felt that she was trying to be all-inclusive by incorporating Nyad’s view of the awe and mystery of life into her amorphous spiritual beliefs. In a similar way, there is a trend in the mental health field to redefine the term “spirituality” in an all-inclusive way that bundles together disparate concepts such as meaning and purpose in life along with belief in supernatural spiritual beings in a way that implies that all people are concerned with “spiritual” matters (Koenig, 2008). (I have touched on this issue in a previous <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201301/troubled-souls-spirituality-mental-health-hazard" title="Troubled Souls: Spirituality as a Mental Health Hazard">post</a>.) The trouble with this is that people may still experience a sense of meaning and purpose in life even if they do not believe in God or a higher power. Similarly, contrary to what Oprah seems to think, people who do not believe in a non-material entity called God can and do still experience a sense of awe at the vastness of the universe we live in. Trying to redefine this experience as being about “God” in some nebulous sense actually marginalises people who do not share her views. If Oprah and people like her wanted to be truly inclusive they would acknowledge that we all share a common humanity regardless of whether or not we choose to believe in something called “God”.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></div>
<o:p></o:p> <br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div>
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Please consider following me on </span></i></b><a href="https://www.facebook.com/UniqueLikeEverybodyElse"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Facebook,</span></i></b></a> <a href="https://plus.google.com/b/116570783533948602312/116570783533948602312/posts"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Google Plus</span></i></b></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">, or </span></i></b><a href="https://twitter.com/ScottAMcGreal"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Twitter</span></i></b></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">.</span></i></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%; mso-ansi-language: EN-AU; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"> </span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%; mso-ansi-language: EN-AU; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%; mso-ansi-language: EN-AU; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"> </span></div>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; color: blue; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">This article also appears on Psychology Today on my blog </span><a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201310/what-oprah-doesnt-understand-about-awe-and-atheists" style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;" target="_blank">Unique - Like Everybody Else.</a><br />
<br /></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">© Scott McGreal. Please do not reproduce without permission. Brief excerpts may be quoted as long as a link to the original article is provided. Any version of this article appearing on sites other than Eye on Psych or my blog at Psychology Today has been ripped off without my consent.</span></b><br />
<b><span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Image Credits<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Oprah poster created by </span><a href="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2013/10/16/boston-atheists-tell-oprah-to-stop-relabeling-atheists/"><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Boston Atheists</span></a><span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;"> – people are welcome to share these on social media<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">“Reality is Awesome” poster created at </span><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><a href="http://diy.despair.com/">Despair, Inc.</a></span><span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;"> </span><br />
<br />
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><o:p></o:p></span> <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXEiKPxCSdA" target="_blank">Link</a> to YouTube video featuring Christopher Hitchens<br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Other posts about the psychology of religion and/or spirituality<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-outline-level: 1;">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201301/troubled-souls-spirituality-mental-health-hazard">Troubled Souls: Spirituality as a Mental Health Hazard</a><span class="MsoHyperlink"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-outline-level: 1;">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201212/the-spirituality-psychedelic-drug-users">The Spirituality of Psychedelic Drug Users</a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-outline-level: 1;">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/reason-versus-faith-the-interplay-intuition-and-rationality-in-sup">Reason Versus Faith? The Interplay of Intuition and Rationality In Supernatural Belief</a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-outline-level: 1;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-outline-level: 1;">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/opening-the-mind-where-skepticism-and-superstition-meet">Opening the Mind: Where Skepticism and Superstition Meet</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-outline-level: 1;">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/is-insulting-religion-extremism">Is Insulting Religion "Extremism"?</a><span class="MsoHyperlink"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-outline-level: 1;">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201309/dogmatism-and-openness-experience-in-the-non-religious" target="_blank"><span class="MsoHyperlink">Dogmatism and Openness to </span>Experience</a><span class="MsoHyperlink"><a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201309/dogmatism-and-openness-experience-in-the-non-religious" target="_blank"> in the Non-Religious</a><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-outline-level: 1;">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201305/belief-in-god-supports-prejudice-against-gays-and-atheists">Belief in God Supports Prejudice Against Gays and Atheists</a><span class="MsoHyperlink"><o:p></o:p></span> <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201403/who-supports-censorship-blasphemous-art" target="_blank">Who Supports Censorship of Blasphemous Art?</a><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>References <o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
<span class="Z3988" title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.jtitle=Mental+Health%2C+Religion+%26+Culture&rft_id=info%3Adoi%2F10.1080%2F13674676.2010.509847&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fresearchblogging.org&rft.atitle=Exploring+the+atheist+personality%3A+well-being%2C+awe%2C+and+magical+thinking+in+atheists%2C+Buddhists%2C+and+Christians&rft.issn=1367-4676&rft.date=2011&rft.volume=14&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=659&rft.epage=672&rft.artnum=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tandfonline.com%2Fdoi%2Fabs%2F10.1080%2F13674676.2010.509847&rft.au=Caldwell-Harris%2C+C.&rft.au=Wilson%2C+A.&rft.au=LoTempio%2C+E.&rft.au=Beit-Hallahmi%2C+B.&rfe_dat=bpr3.included=1;bpr3.tags=Psychology%2CPersonality%2C+Atheism%2C+Prejudice">Caldwell-Harris, C., Wilson, A., LoTempio, E., & Beit-Hallahmi, B. (2011). Exploring the atheist personality: well-being, awe, and magical thinking in atheists, Buddhists, and Christians <span style="font-style: italic;">Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 14</span> (7), 659-672 DOI: <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13674676.2010.509847" rev="review">10.1080/13674676.2010.509847</a></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Keltner, D., & Haidt, J. (2003). Approaching Awe, a Moral, Spiritual, and Aesthetic Emotion. <i>Cognition and Emotion, 17</i>(2), 297-394. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Koenig, H. G. (2008). Concerns About Measuring "Spirituality" in Research. <i>The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 196</i>(5), 349-355 310.1097/NMD.1090b1013e31816ff31796. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
<span class="Z3988" title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.jtitle=Psychological+science&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F22886132&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fresearchblogging.org&rft.atitle=Awe+expands+people%27s+perception+of+time%2C+alters+decision+making%2C+and+enhances+well-being.&rft.issn=0956-7976&rft.date=2012&rft.volume=23&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=1130&rft.epage=6&rft.artnum=&rft.au=Rudd+M&rft.au=Vohs+KD&rft.au=Aaker+J&rfe_dat=bpr3.included=1;bpr3.tags=Psychology%2CPersonality%2C+Consciousness">Rudd M, Vohs KD, & Aaker J (2012). Awe expands people's perception of time, alters decision making, and enhances well-being. <span style="font-style: italic;">Psychological science, 23</span> (10), 1130-6 PMID: <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22886132" rev="review">22886132</a></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Zuckerman, P. (2009). Atheism, Secularity, and Well-Being: How the Findings of Social Science Counter Negative Stereotypes and Assumptions. <i>Sociology Compass, 3</i>(6), 949-971. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-9020.2009.00247.x<o:p></o:p></div>
Scott McGrealhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13757633582829269183noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2304269645366413372.post-2069904511987191562014-02-11T18:10:00.002+11:002014-03-15T19:59:22.724+11:00Is Parapsychology a "Taboo" Subject in Science? <div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="float: left; padding: 5px;"><a href="http://www.researchblogging.org/"><img alt="ResearchBlogging.org" src="http://www.researchblogging.org/public/citation_icons/rb2_large_gray.png" style="border: 0;" /></a></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Parapsychology has been a controversial subject from its very inception. Many scientists have expressed doubts that <i>psi</i> – the broad term for paranormal phenomena such as telepathy, precognition, and psychokinesis – is real or that parapsychology is a genuine science. On the other hand, some scientists support parapsychology, and in fact an opinion piece recently published in <a href="http://www.frontiersin.org/Journal/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00017/full" title="A call for an open, informed study of all aspects of consciousness"><i>Frontiers in Human Neuroscience</i></a>, endorsed by 100 signatories calls for a more “open-minded” consideration of the subject. What particularly struck me about this piece was the claim that investigation into the subject is not just controversial, but actually “taboo”. Examination of the history of parapsychology indicates that the scientific mainstream has shown considerable open-mindedness towards the subject, and that claims that it has been treated as some sort of “forbidden” topic are both hyperbolic and disingenuous. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br />
</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgsHdW6pCzprgmnLyv5vtxg0RvRlGAzG6NoBMGHODran8aIJdgebM31vjq0pZsKdgeq1f-J_Nc-5ZOQHb42bxtCrHgVy4PHKrmbkmv8C4i3C8i66A1stbW3S2YKzRJ5fRkvkOirgS-PJRw/s1600/450px-PsychicBoston.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgsHdW6pCzprgmnLyv5vtxg0RvRlGAzG6NoBMGHODran8aIJdgebM31vjq0pZsKdgeq1f-J_Nc-5ZOQHb42bxtCrHgVy4PHKrmbkmv8C4i3C8i66A1stbW3S2YKzRJ5fRkvkOirgS-PJRw/s1600/450px-PsychicBoston.jpg" height="320" width="240" /></span></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<i><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Does "Theresa" possess forbidden knowledge that scientists are not allowed to investigate?</span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br />
</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Although parapsychology has been studying paranormal phenomena for over 130 years, currently it exists mainly at the fringes of scientific institutions. Mainstream science largely ignores psi, e.g. physics textbooks make no mention of the possibility that mental events might influence physical objects at a distance and science funding agencies generally will not financially support parapsychology research (Alcock, 1987).<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="line-height: 107%;">[1]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span> <o:p></o:p></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="line-height: 107%;"><br />
</span></span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Naturally parapsychologists object to this state of affairs and the authors of the opinion piece (Cardeña, 2014) “call for an open, informed study” of the subject. However, they do not explain what specifically prompted such a call at this particular time. Signatories to the piece include such mainstream psychology notables as Daryl Bem and Phil Zimbardo, as well as researchers into more fringe oriented topics like <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dean_Radin">Dean Radin</a> and <a href="http://www2.gre.ac.uk/about/schools/health/about/departments/psycoun/staff/dr-david-luke">David Luke</a><span style="line-height: 107%;">[2]</span></span>. The article starts off, apparently quite reasonably, arguing that scientists need to consider all evidence in an open-minded manner and “recognise that scientific knowledge is provisional and subject to revision.” This is in contrast to deciding things dogmatically or by appeal to authority figures. No argument from me so far. The author then goes on to bemoan the fact that purported phenomena such as telepathy and precognition have not been embraced by mainstream science. A set of claims is then made to the effect that parapsychology is a valid science and that there is evidence to support the existence of psi. <span style="line-height: 107%;">Sceptics such as Ray Hyman on the other hand </span><a href="http://www.csicop.org/si/show/anomalous_cognition_a_second_perspective/" title="Anomalous Cognition? A Second Perspective"><span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">argue</span></a><span style="line-height: 107%;"> that they find the evidence unconvincing because attempts to reliably replicate initially successful psi experiments have had a history of repeated failure. I have also expressed scepticism about parapsychology in previous posts (see </span><a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/precognition-science-or-fanta-psi" style="line-height: 106%;" title="Precognition: Science or Fanta-Psi?">here</a> and <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/the-magical-world-parapsychology" style="line-height: 106%;" title="The Magical World of Parapsychology">here</a>. However, this is not particularly what I wish to focus on here.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><br />
</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">What exactly the author and the signatories hope to achieve by publishing this article is not entirely clear. However, the following statement provides some clues: “This research has continued for over a century <i>despite the taboo against investigating the topic</i>, almost complete lack of funding, and professional and personal attacks” (emphasis added). Lack of funding and professional and personal attacks I can well believe. Funding bodies have limited resources and so may have good reasons for declining to fund a field they consider unpromising. Professional and personal attacks, however regrettable, occur in many fields of endeavour, and are hardly unique to parapsychology. But claiming that there is an actual <i>taboo </i>against investigating the topic is a very puzzling one indeed for which the article offers no evidence or even any definition of what this is supposed to mean.<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="line-height: 107%;">[3]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span> In fact, the article actually cites survey evidence to the effect that only a minority of scientists dismiss parapsychology as pseudoscience or an illegitimate area of study. If this is correct, then how could parapsychology actually be taboo? Does this minority group of parapsychology-deniers have some special veto power that they can impose on the majority? <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br />
</span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="font-weight: normal; line-height: 107%;">Taboo implies that investigating the topic is strictly forbidden and that anyone who dares to defy the taboo can expect severe punishment. This is a pretty serious charge, as it implies that mainstream scientists have actively prohibited curious investigators from studying the subject with an open mind, contrary to the whole spirit of scientific inquiry. Some parapsychologists have gone so far as to accuse mainstream scientists of being </span><a href="http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=sJgONrua8IkC&pg=PT237&dq=%22dean+radin%22+pseudoscience&hl=en&sa=X&ei=xdNlUv_QONLB0gWU8YHQCg#v=onepage&q=%22dean%20radin%22%20pseudoscience&f=false" title="Pseudoscience and Extraordinary Claims of the Paranormal: A Critical Thinker's Toolkit"><span style="font-weight: normal; line-height: 107%;">prejudiced</span></a><span style="font-weight: normal; line-height: 107%;"> against the subject or even having an irrational </span><a href="http://news.discovery.com/human/psychology/do-scientists-fear-the-paranormal-130115.htm" title="Do Scientists Fear the Paranormal?"><span style="font-weight: normal; line-height: 107%;">fear of psi</span></a><span style="font-weight: normal; line-height: 107%;">. A google </span><a href="https://www.google.com.au/search?sclient=psy-ab&q=parapsychology%20taboo&oq=&gs_l=&pbx=1&biw=1366&bih=600&pf=p&pdl=300&cad=cbv&sei=DaXoUsaTBIXwkAWP5YDwBA"><span style="line-height: 107%;">search</span></a><span style="font-weight: normal; line-height: 107%;"> of “parapsychology taboo” reveals that this claim is not new and has been widely repeated by parapsychologists. Dean Radin, one of the article’s signatories, in particular once gave a </span><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qw_O9Qiwqew" title=""Science and the taboo of psi" with Dean Radin"><span style="font-weight: normal; line-height: 107%;">lecture</span></a><span style="font-weight: normal; line-height: 107%;"> called “</span><span style="border: 1pt none windowtext; font-weight: normal; line-height: 107%; padding: 0cm;">Science and the taboo of psi” in which he claims flatly that the </span><span style="font-weight: normal; line-height: 107%;">“This taboo has been sustained for over 100 years.” (About 4:35 in the video.) He also states that “it is extremely difficult to get accurate reporting of this topic in the science media”<a href="file:///C:/Users/dse721/Google%20Drive/My%20Documents/blog/parapsychology/Parapsychology%20and%20taboo%20blogger.docx#_ftn4" name="_ftnref4" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="line-height: 107%;">[4]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></a> and implies that the media selectively reports only studies that disconfirm parapsychology but is strangely silent about ones that validate it. (An informative critique of this video can be read </span><a href="http://spiritualityisnoexcuse.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/a-lesson-in-pseudo-science-with-dean-radin/" title="A Lesson in Paranormal Cheating with Dean Radin"><span style="line-height: 107%;">here</span></a><span style="font-weight: normal; line-height: 107%;">.) A few years after Radin’s lecture, Daryl Bem’s (2011) paper that claimed to provide evidence that people can “feel the future” received an enormous amount of media attention (e.g. in </span><a href="http://discovermagazine.com/2012/mar/09-paranormal-circumstances-scientist-mission-esp#.UuipbRAzHIU" title="Paranormal Circumstances: One Influential Scientist's Quixotic Mission to Prove ESP Exists"><i><span style="line-height: 107%;">Discover</span></i></a></span><span style="font-weight: normal; line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> magazine<a href="file:///C:/Users/dse721/Google%20Drive/My%20Documents/blog/parapsychology/Parapsychology%20and%20taboo%20blogger.docx#_ftn5" name="_ftnref5" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="line-height: 107%;">[5]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></a>). Perhaps parapsychology is no longer so “taboo” as it was a few years ago? Alternatively, maybe it never was taboo in the first place. The fact that mainstream science tends not to take parapsychology seriously is not proof of an irrational taboo, as scientists may have good reasons for being unconvinced of its claims. Cardeña and company enjoin sceptics to consider the evidence with an open mind, so it would be helpful to examine just what evidence there is that parapsychology has ever been a taboo topic. <o:p></o:p></span><br />
<o:p></o:p></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br />
</span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="font-weight: normal; line-height: 107%;">According to Alcock (1987), when parapsychology research began in the 1880’s, a number of prominent psychologists, such as Pierre Janet and William James, along with scientists from other fields, were involved in looking for evidence of paranormal phenomena and psychical research societies were set up in France, America and Britain. The Fourth International Congress of Psychology held in 1900 in Paris had an entire section devoted to psychical research and spiritualism. Much of this research focused on investigating the alleged powers of spiritualist mediums, many of whom turned out to be frauds. As a result, many psychologists lost interest in the subject. <o:p></o:p></span></span><o:p></o:p><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br />
</span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="font-weight: normal; line-height: 107%;">Parapsychology attracted attention again in the 1930’s with the pioneering experimental research into ESP by </span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Banks_Rhine"><span style="font-weight: normal; line-height: 107%;">JB Rhine</span></a><span style="font-weight: normal; line-height: 107%;"> at Duke University. A 1938 poll of psychologists found that 89% of them thought that the study of psi was a legitimate scientific exercise (Alcock, 1989). I suppose they were not aware that this was supposed to be a taboo subject. Unfortunately, methodological problems in Rhine’s studies were exposed that invalidated his conclusions, and psi research failed to gain mainstream scientific support. <o:p></o:p></span></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj9tDOTRcPrLk0uwHmHDk3hqrPXuqAsTbO_51_Pu9ruVF-9T_-tD_Ksq0LzfN2Vy7o25X6bcJl2O6PWAeVkn2tr69OwL_yEacMt58h4H5ZUxvNcc83JZ5HQd5A5Ssu7KEoZk_aTdxCiCiU/s1600/Zenerkarten_c.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj9tDOTRcPrLk0uwHmHDk3hqrPXuqAsTbO_51_Pu9ruVF-9T_-tD_Ksq0LzfN2Vy7o25X6bcJl2O6PWAeVkn2tr69OwL_yEacMt58h4H5ZUxvNcc83JZ5HQd5A5Ssu7KEoZk_aTdxCiCiU/s1600/Zenerkarten_c.jpg" height="110" width="320" /></span></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-weight: normal; line-height: 107%;"><br />
</span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-weight: normal; line-height: 107%;"><br />
</span></div>
<o:p></o:p><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br />
</span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="font-weight: normal; line-height: 107%;">Parapsychology received mainstream attention in the 1960’s and 70’s. In 1969, the Parapsychology Association became an affiliate of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (</span><a href="http://www.aaas.org/"><span style="font-weight: normal; line-height: 107%;">AAAS</span></a><span style="font-weight: normal; line-height: 107%;">). The AAAS is a well-respected international institution of mainstream science, rather than some fringe organisation. (It is worth noting that a 1982 survey of “elite” scientists in the AAAS found that only 4% of 339 thought that ESP had been scientifically established (Alcock, 1987).) In 1974, <i>Nature, </i>one of the most prestigious scientific journals in the world, agreed to publish a paper by Targ and Puthoff (1974), which presented results of a series of experiments apparently showing evidence of paranormal phenomena such as clairvoyance and remote viewing. Several of these experiments used the notorious Uri Geller as their test subject. This paper was preceded by an editorial ("Investigating the paranormal," 1974) which noted a number of shortcomings of the paper identified by the peer reviewers, such as weaknesses in design and presentation, “uncomfortably vague” details about the safeguards and precautions against conscious and unconscious fraud, and the criticism that the paper seemed more “a series of pilot studies… than a report of a completed experiment.” The editors go on to say that in spite of these criticisms, two of the three reviewers of the paper felt that it should be published because it was a serious attempt to “investigate under laboratory conditions phenomena which, while highly implausible to many scientists, would nevertheless seem to be worthy of investigation even if, in the final analysis, negative findings are revealed.” The editor goes on to explain that although <i>Nature </i>is a highly respected journal, they occasionally publish “high-risk” papers, and that “the unusual must now and then be allowed a toe-hold in the literature, sometimes to flourish, more often to be forgotten within a year or two.” <o:p></o:p></span></span><o:p></o:p><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br />
</span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="font-weight: normal; line-height: 107%;">What the quotes from the editorial show is that the editors and reviewers of one of the world’s most highly respected journals, far from demonstrating their dogmatic prejudice against a “taboo” topic, went out of their way to be open-minded and allow informed discussion of a controversial topic, even though it was regarded by many scientists as “highly implausible”. <o:p></o:p></span></span><o:p></o:p><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br />
</span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="font-weight: normal; line-height: 107%;">A similar incident occurred again in 2011, when Daryl Bem, one of the signatories to the <i>Frontiers</i> article claiming that parapsychology is taboo, published his paper on precognition (Bem, 2011) in the <i>Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. </i>This journal is considered the flagship publication in its field, and news of this paper generated an enormous media response, even before it was officially published. Once again, the editors of the journal were moved to write an editorial explaining the reasons why such a paper was accepted and including this statement:<o:p></o:p></span></span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">We openly admit that the reported findings conflict with our own beliefs about causality and that we find them extremely puzzling. Yet, as editors we were guided by the conviction that this paper—as strange as the findings may be—should be evaluated just as any other manuscript on the basis of rigorous peer review. (Judd & Gawronski, 2011)</span></blockquote>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Yet again, the editors of a respected mainstream journal have gone out of their way to ensure that parapsychological research receives a fair and informed hearing, even though in this case the editors acknowledge that they find the reported findings very hard to believe. Admittedly, it is a rare event for papers on parapsychology research to be published in such top-tier journals. However, the fact remains that they were published. Alcock (1987) also notes that between 1950 and 1987 over 1500 parapsychological papers were abstracted in <i>Psychological Abstracts, </i>which is published by the American Psychological Association<i>. </i>Research on the subject has hardly been suppressed by the mainstream then.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br />
</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">In summary, the claim by Cardeña and colleagues that investigating parapsychology has been taboo, and Dean Radin’s claim that “this taboo has been sustained for over 100 years” due to dogmatic prejudice and close-mindedness appears to be nonsensical. Parapsychology has had multiple opportunities for over a century to earn mainstream acceptance. Furthermore, when parapsychologists have had studies published in mainstream journals, scientists have responded to them by subjecting them to careful scrutiny rather than ignoring them. As this <a href="http://news.discovery.com/human/psychology/do-scientists-fear-the-paranormal-130115.htm" title="Do Scientists Fear the Paranormal?">Discovery article</a> points out, after Daryl Bem published his paper on precognition, other teams of scientists (see <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0033423" title="Failing the Future: Three Unsuccessful Attempts to Replicate Bem's ‘Retroactive Facilitation of Recall’ Effect">here</a> for example) independently attempted their own experiments to see if Bem’s results could be replicated. In 2012 a <a href="http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2001721" title="Correcting the Past: Failures to Replicate Psi">meta-analysis</a> of all known attempts to replicate Bem’s findings was published (Galak, LeBoeuf, Nelson, & Simmons, 2012) which concluded that the average effect size for precognition was no different from zero. Some parapsychologists such as Dean Radin, have accused critics of parapsychology of being “scientific fundamentalists” who are unwilling to consider that their model of the world might be wrong. On the contrary, Smith (2011) <a href="http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=sJgONrua8IkC&pg=PT237&dq=%22dean+radin%22+pseudoscience&hl=en&sa=X&ei=xdNlUv_QONLB0gWU8YHQCg#v=onepage&q=a%20challenge%20to%20psi%20researchers&f=false">points out</a> that mainstream science has actually advanced by accepting challenges to its model of the world. He gives the recent example of the discovery of dark energy. Prior to this discovery, the conventional view in cosmology was that the expansion of the universe was slowing down. However, astronomical observations led to the observation that the rate of the universal expansion was actually accelerating instead, suggesting that a previously unknown antigravity force exists. Five years of observation was all that was needed to completely revise our understanding of cosmology and now dark energy is being studied intensively and receives massive funding. Compare this to the over 130 years that parapsychologists have had to establish the existence of psi. It seems to me that if parapsychology has not won widespread acceptance it is most likely because of the emptiness of the subject itself and its repeated failures to create an evidence base rather than because of alleged bigotry on the part of scientists or some supposed unspecified taboo for which no evidence has been provided. </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">Footnotes</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"><b><br />
</b></span></div>
<hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" />
<div id="ftn1">
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 17.1200008392334px;">[1]</span></span></span> <span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14.266666412353516px;">On the other hand the United States government provided millions of dollars of funding into military uses of psi research, particularly </span><a href="http://www.lfr.org/lfr/csl/library/AirReport.pdf" title="An Evaluation of Remote Viewing:Research and Applications"><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14.266666412353516px;">remote viewing</span></a><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14.266666412353516px;">, for over 20 years, only to abandon it in 1995 after it had produced no useful applications.</span><o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn2">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14.266666412353516px;">[2]</span></span></span> Examples of David Luke’s interest in fringe topics include this <a href="http://www.exopolitics.org.uk/option,com_docman/task,doc_view/gid,30/Itemid,84/" title="Disembodied eyes revisited. An investigation into the ontology of entheogenic entity encounters.">paper</a> on non-human entities perceived under the influence of psychedelic drugs (see <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/dmt-aliens-and-reality-part-1" title="DMT, Aliens, and Reality—Part 1: Psychedelic drug phenomena do not justify radical new views of reality.">here</a> and <a href="https://my.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/dmt-aliens-and-reality-part-2" title="DMT, Aliens, and Reality—Part 2: People may believe in things that are not real for many reasons.">here</a> for my own, less esoteric, views on the subject) and this paper “<a href="https://www.academia.edu/766411/Parapsychology_as_a_science_of_magick_An_occult_perspective_on_psi">Parapsychology as a science of magick: An occult perspective on psi</a>.”<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn3">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14.266666412353516px;">[3]</span></span></span> The quote from the article includes a <a href="http://www.biomedsearch.com/article/wolverines-epistemological-totalitarianism/263250457.html" title="On wolverines and epistemological totalitarianism.">citation</a> by Cardeña (2011) which gives examples of professional and personal attacks against (and by) parapsychologists, but contains no mention of a “taboo” or issues with funding.<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn4">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14.266666412353516px;">[4]</span></span></span> As an example of faulty reporting of parapsychology in the “science media” he cites an article from <i>The Boston Globe, </i>an online newspaper. Why he considers a general news source to represent the “science media” is not exactly clear.<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn5">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14.266666412353516px;">[5]</span></span></span> Which has a more credible claim to represent “science media” than <i>The Boston Globe </i>which Radin cites.</div>
</div>
<h1 style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; font-weight: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;"> </span><span style="color: #222222; font-size: 12.0pt; font-weight: normal;"><o:p></o:p></span></h1>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; color: blue; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">Please consider following me on </span></i></b><a href="https://www.facebook.com/UniqueLikeEverybodyElse"><b><i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">Facebook,</span></i></b></a> <a href="https://plus.google.com/b/116570783533948602312/116570783533948602312/posts"><b><i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">Google Plus</span></i></b></a><b><i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; color: blue; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">, or </span></i></b><a href="https://twitter.com/ScottAMcGreal"><b><i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">Twitter</span></i></b></a><b><i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; color: blue; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; color: blue; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"><br />
</span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; color: red; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">© Scott McGreal. Please do not reproduce without permission. Brief excerpts may be quoted as long as a link to the original article is provided. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; color: red; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"><br />
</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; color: blue; font-family: Arial, sans-serif;">This article also appears on Psychology Today on my blog <b><a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201401/is-there-scientific-taboo-against-parapsychology" target="_blank">Unique - Like Everybody Else</a>.</b></span><span style="color: red;"><b><o:p></o:p></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; color: blue; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"><br />
</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white;"><b><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">My previous articles on parapsychology:</span></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; color: blue; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;"><b><br />
</b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; color: blue; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;"><b></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/precognition-science-or-fanta-psi" target="_blank">Precognition: Science or Fanta-Psi?</a> Science meets Alice in Wonderland - has parapsychology gone mainstream?</span></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/the-magical-world-parapsychology" target="_blank">The Magical World of Parapsychology: Parapsychology is a fruitless quest for "spiritual truths".</a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div>
<strong>Further reading </strong><br />
<a data-mce-href="http://doubtfulnews.com/2014/01/editorial-signed-by-psi-researchers-calls-for-open-mindedness/" href="http://doubtfulnews.com/2014/01/editorial-signed-by-psi-researchers-calls-for-open-mindedness/" target="_blank">Editorial by psi researchers calls for open mindedness</a> - interesting take on the <em>Frontiers </em>letter by <em>Doubtful News</em> site.<br />
<br />
<a data-mce-href="http://spiritualityisnoexcuse.wordpress.com/2013/10/20/there-is-no-taboo-on-studying-psychic-phenomena-just-boredom/" href="http://spiritualityisnoexcuse.wordpress.com/2013/10/20/there-is-no-taboo-on-studying-psychic-phenomena-just-boredom/" target="_blank">There is no taboo on studying psychic phenomena, just boredom</a> - this was written before the <em>Frontiers </em>letter, but provides a good debunking of claims about a "taboo."<br />
<br />
<a data-mce-href="http://www.susanblackmore.co.uk/Articles/si87.html" href="http://www.susanblackmore.co.uk/Articles/si87.html" target="_blank">The Elusive Open Mind: Ten Years of Negative Research in Parapsychology</a> by Dr Susan Blackmore. A remarkable account of how a parapsychologist became disillusioned by the search for psi after a decade of sincere but fruitless attempts to find evidence for it.<br />
<br />
<em><strong>Image credits</strong></em>: Psychic by John Stephen Dwyer via <a data-mce-href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PsychicBoston.jpg" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PsychicBoston.jpg" target="_blank">Wikipedia</a>; Zener Cards via <a data-mce-href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Zenerkarten_c.jpg" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Zenerkarten_c.jpg" target="_blank">Wikipedia</a>. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">References </span></b><span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Alcock, J. E. (1987). Parapsychology: Science of the anomalous or search for the soul? <i>Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 10</i>(4), 553-643. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Bem, D. J. (2011). Feeling the future: Experimental evidence for anomalous retroactive influences on cognition and affect. <i>Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100</i>(3), 407-425. doi: 10.1037/a0021524<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Cardeña, E. (2011). On Wolverines and Epistemological Totalitarianism. <i>Journal of Scientific Exploration, 25</i>(3), 539–551. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
<span class="Z3988" title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.jtitle=Frontiers+in+Human+Neuroscience&rft_id=info%3Adoi%2F10.3389%2Ffnhum.2014.00017&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fresearchblogging.org&rft.atitle=A+call+for+an+open%2C+informed+study+of+all+aspects+of+consciousness.+%5BOpinion%5D&rft.issn=&rft.date=2014&rft.volume=8&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.epage=&rft.artnum=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.frontiersin.org%2FJournal%2F10.3389%2Ffnhum.2014.00017%2Ffull&rft.au=Carde%C3%B1a%2C+E.&rfe_dat=bpr3.included=1;bpr3.tags=Psychology%2COther%2CParapsychology%2C+Consciousness">Cardeña, E. (2014). A call for an open, informed study of all aspects of consciousness. [Opinion] <span style="font-style: italic;">Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8</span> DOI: <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00017" rev="review">10.3389/fnhum.2014.00017</a></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Galak, J., LeBoeuf, R. A., Nelson, L. D., & Simmons, J. P. (2012). Correcting the past: Failures to replicate psi. <i>Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Advance online publication</i>. doi: 10.1037/a0029709<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Investigating the paranormal. (1974). <i>Nature, 251</i>(5476), 559-560. doi: 10.1038/251559a0<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Judd, C. M., & Gawronski, B. (2011). Editorial Comment. <i>Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 100</i>(3), 406. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Smith, J. C. (2011). A challenge to psi researchers <i>Pseudoscience and Extraordinary Claims of the Paranormal: A Critical Thinker's Toolkit</i>: Wiley-Blackwell.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Targ, R., & Puthoff, H. (1974). Information transmission under conditions of sensory shielding. <i>Nature, 251</i>, 602-607. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/251602a0<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div>
<div id="ftn5">
</div>
</div>
Scott McGrealhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13757633582829269183noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2304269645366413372.post-7350531354762393922013-12-27T15:31:00.002+11:002014-11-07T13:49:00.020+11:00Life History Strategy and the Allure of the Dark Side: Evidence against a General Factor of Personality<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 17px;"><span style="float: left; padding: 5px;"><a href="http://www.researchblogging.org/"><img alt="ResearchBlogging.org" src="http://www.researchblogging.org/public/citation_icons/rb2_large_gray.png" style="border: 0;" /></a></span></span><br />
<span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">In a previous </span><a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201211/personalitys-big-one-reality-or-artifact" title="Personality's "Big One": Reality or Artefact?"><span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">post</span></a><span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">,
I discussed evidence for and against a general factor of personality (GFP).
Existing theories of personality organise personality traits in a hierarchical
structure, in which a small number of broad factors, say five or six, subsume a
vast number of narrower traits. Some psychologists have proposed a higher order
general factor that combines all the broad traits into one super-factor
composed of all the socially desirable features of personality. According to
one theory, the general factor of personality represents an evolved “slow” life
history strategy associated with long-term mating as opposed to a "fast" strategy
associated with short-term mating. However, a recent study suggests that both
slow and fast life history strategies each combine mixtures of desirable and
undesirable traits. The findings of this study might help explain not only why
so many people have “dark personalities” embodying socially undesirable traits,
but why these traits can actually attractive. The so-called general factor of
personality might represent an imagined ideal that few people embody rather
than a single underlying dimension of human personality variation. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgt9ApmC3VSbuvU-soOP2uEXefwaN5A9WKWergUdI6ZcBETI4NOwHChw_fXGSBk7mLTcDM59t3WG4jdPBkfB0YSUA_a5c3lYxe4L-j50I3-Pio9UJjA-ha6FjofkorJeSu5aAlwYPfTTm8/s1600/Darth_Vader_by_Dualspades.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgt9ApmC3VSbuvU-soOP2uEXefwaN5A9WKWergUdI6ZcBETI4NOwHChw_fXGSBk7mLTcDM59t3WG4jdPBkfB0YSUA_a5c3lYxe4L-j50I3-Pio9UJjA-ha6FjofkorJeSu5aAlwYPfTTm8/s320/Darth_Vader_by_Dualspades.jpg" height="213" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="line-height: 17px;"><i>The Dark Side has a strange allure for many people</i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">Currently, the most widely accepted
model of personality traits model is the Big Five, which consists of </span><span style="background: white; color: #333333; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">neuroticism</span><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; line-height: 107%;">, extraversion, agreeableness,<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/personality-intelligence-and-race-realism" title="Personality, Intelligence, and "Race Realism" t "><span style="background: white; color: #333333; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">conscientiousness</span></a><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; line-height: 107%;">, and </span><a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/opening-the-mind-where-skepticism-and-superstition-meet" target="_blank" title="Opening the Mind"><span style="background: white; color: #333333; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">openness to experience</span></a><span class="MsoHyperlink"><span style="background: white; color: #333333; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">,</span></span><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; line-height: 107%;"> all of which are considered to be </span><span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">separate
and distinct from each other.<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"> A more
recent model which has become increasingly popular, the </span></span><a href="http://hexaco.org/"><span style="background: white; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">HEXACO</span></a><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="line-height: 107%;">, adds a sixth factor of honesty-humility to the
Big </span><span style="line-height: 17px;">Five.<span style="font-size: xx-small;">[1]</span></span><span style="line-height: 107%;"> Although they disagree about the exact number, both of these models
agree that the top of the personality hierarchy consists of multiple and
distinct factors. However, some psychologists, have argued that these broad
factors are not actually independent and that there is higher order super-factor
atop the personality hierarchy that combines all of them into one (Musek, 2007). For example, Rushton and Irwin (2011)
argued that this general factor is a dimension of “good personality” as opposed
to a “difficult personality”, with desirable traits manifested at one end, e.g.
someone who is friendly, cooperative, relaxed, reliable, and clever compared to
someone who does not get along with others, and is selfish, manipulative,
irritable and dense. Studies on the GFP have found that it is positively
correlated with subjective well-being, self-esteem, </span></span>trait <span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%; mso-ansi-language: EN-AU; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/emotional-intelligence-not-relevant-psychopaths" title="Emotional Intelligence is not relevant to understanding Psychopaths">emotional
intelligence</a></span>, and even <span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%; mso-ansi-language: EN-AU; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201305/intelligence-and-politics-have-complex-relationship" title="Intelligence and Political Orientation have a complex relationship">general
intelligence</a></span> apparently. Perhaps, this combination of
traits should be called the “best” personality rather than merely “good”? <span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; line-height: 107%;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; line-height: 107%;">Rushton
and Irwing proposed that this general factor of personality reflects a single
broad dimension that has been selected for in human evolution they call the
K-factor. This K-factor supposedly applies to a whole range of </span><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;"><a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/the-pseudoscience-race-differences-in-penis-size" title="The Pseudoscience of Race Differences in Penis Size">human
characteristics</a></span><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; line-height: 107%;"> that are said to have co-evolved, including </span>altruism,
intelligence, attachment styles, growth, longevity, <span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%; mso-ansi-language: EN-AU; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201212/porn-stars-and-evolutionary-psychology" title="Porn Stars And Evolutionary Psychology">sexuality</a></span>, and fecundity
and which “form a coherent whole” (Rushton &
Irwing, 2011). The idea of a K-factor is the basis for what is called
life history theory which looks at individual differences in human reproductive
strategies. According to this theory, people with a “slow” life history
strategy (characterised by a preference for long-term mating) exhibit a high
K-factor, whereas people with a “fast” life history strategy (characterised by
a preference for <span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%; mso-ansi-language: EN-AU; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201301/the-personalities-porn-stars" title="Personalities of Porn Stars">short-term mating and promiscuity</a></span>) exhibit a low K-factor. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
According to a number of studies, slow life history strategy
is associated with better mental and physical health and subjective well-being
and with greater relationship satisfaction. On the other, fast life history strategy has been linked with
socially undesirable characteristics, such as criminality and antisocial
behaviour including sexual coercion (Sherman,
Figueredo, & Funder, 2013). If this is true, then it would seem that
from an evolutionary standpoint the slow strategy is desirable in every way,
while the fast strategy is completely undesirable. This is problematic because
if one strategy is “better” in every way, the alternative strategy should have
died out long ago for failure to compete. However, the fact that so many people
still utilise a fast strategy suggests that it may be adaptive under some
circumstances. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In spite of the alleged global adaptive superiority of the
slow strategy, there is evidence that this strategy involves costs as well as
benefits and conversely that the fast strategy enjoys its own advantages, in
spite of its drawbacks. This is because socially desirable behaviours are
generally those that are good for other people but not necessarily oneself,
while socially undesirable behaviours inflict costs on other people rather than
on the self. Social norms then tend to favour behaviour that is closer to the
slow end of the continuum. Hence, even though the slow strategy is desirable
from the viewpoint of society, it is not always in the interests of the
individual. For example, being honest and altruistic benefits society but may
be costly to the individual. Conversely, lying and cheating are costly to
society but may benefit the individual, at least in the short term. The slow
strategy might be smarter in the long-term, but generally requires individuals
to make sacrifices for the good of others. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhQDt23ryCw1ygxsLZaTvJXuzeYBH7UycJLNJPkOoawFxNyCcGlB3Do9dH2yivVU2_FQXazTFYu8bQQcvmTOdrtyhuNhvYA1_f4qKRIKJnERyCmksUg78_9CzewqfnrQPo9O_40LnIB5s/s1600/sacrifice+poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhQDt23ryCw1ygxsLZaTvJXuzeYBH7UycJLNJPkOoawFxNyCcGlB3Do9dH2yivVU2_FQXazTFYu8bQQcvmTOdrtyhuNhvYA1_f4qKRIKJnERyCmksUg78_9CzewqfnrQPo9O_40LnIB5s/s320/sacrifice+poster.jpg" height="244" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<i>This might be taking the slow strategy a bit too far</i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Recently Sherman et al. (2013) tested the idea that the slow
and fast strategies respectively combine both adaptive and maladaptive traits. Previous
studies on life history strategy that found that the slow strategy was
associated with just about every benefit one could want have been based on
self-report measures of behaviour and personality. Similarly, most studies that
have been used to validate a GFP have relied on self-report as well. A problem
with self-report measures is that people’s responses may reflect evaluative
biases. Because the slow strategy is so socially normative, people’s responses
may be biased towards reporting what is considered “normal”. This could explain
to some extent why the slow strategy is supposed to be associated with physical
and mental health, considering that the latter are also normative. Sherman et
al.’s research therefore used studies based on direct observations of behaviour
as well as participants’ reports of their behaviour in the last 24 hours to
overcome some of the limitations of self-report measures. Trained raters were
asked to assess how closely individual participants matched a template for
either a slow or fast life history strategy based on assessments of their
behavior. The template for the slow pattern included qualities such as
responsible, warm, compassionate and capable of close relationships. The fast
template included qualities of unpredictable, deceitful, manipulative, and
non-conforming. The resulting pattern that emerged was that those who more
closely matched the slow template were described as kind, considerate, and hard
working, yet also socially awkward, insecure, shy, lacking expressiveness and
emotionally over-controlled. Those who more closely matched the fast template
were described as unpredictable, hostile, moody, manipulative and impulsive,
yet also talkative, socially skilled, dominant, assertive charming and
interesting. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
What these results suggest is that both the slow and fast
strategies have their respective strengths and weaknesses. This is consistent
with the idea that each one may be adaptive under some circumstances, yet
maladaptive under others. On the other hand, the results appear to contradict
the notion that one strategy is globally better than the other. Furthermore, in
terms of personality traits expressed, neither strategy appears to fit in with
the notion of a general factor of personality which combines all socially
desirable traits in a uniform way. Participants who demonstrated a slow
strategy could be described as agreeable, conscientious, and honest, yet also
introverted and to a certain extent neurotic. On the other hand, those who demonstrated
a fast strategy showed the opposite pattern of disagreeableness, dishonesty,
and low conscientiousness, but were also more extraverted and emotionally
stable. The fast life history strategy also seems consistent with a group of
socially undesirable traits known as the “dark triad” of <span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%; mso-ansi-language: EN-AU; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/emotional-intelligence-not-relevant-psychopaths" title="Emotional Intelligence and Psychopathy">psychopathy</a></span>,
Machiavellianism, and narcissism. One study found that people who are high in
“dark triad” traits tend to manifest a pattern of being selfish, disagreeable
and low in conscientiousness, yet also extraverted, confident and socially
dominant <span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-no-proof: yes;">(Jonason, Li, & Teicher, 2010)</span><span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">.
This particular pattern of traits may allow people to successfully exploit
others for selfish reasons and yet escape social punishment due to their social
skills and charms. The authors of this paper compared this personality
configuration to James Bond. Another real life example is the Italian
adventurer Casanova. This fascinating fellow, notorious for his many love
affairs, was noted as a sparkling conversationalist who stated that the chief
business of his life was cultivating sensory pleasure. He also admitted to
swindling people who he managed to convince that he had magical powers. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhwX-TNTuH6y5eanzCheIc5_Yw_8OTkzNprZPZGfstsqf8AdPqCaKM7Okemcx2S8Qoc1fe8GfO5rpDH7dbfa0BcHJYNiCNtP7BMOE-KPtnudTomQ0bgtf_9Ba1LCOdoahcy-FlUDEKXN5Y/s1600/280px-Bond_-_Sean_Connery_-_Profile.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhwX-TNTuH6y5eanzCheIc5_Yw_8OTkzNprZPZGfstsqf8AdPqCaKM7Okemcx2S8Qoc1fe8GfO5rpDH7dbfa0BcHJYNiCNtP7BMOE-KPtnudTomQ0bgtf_9Ba1LCOdoahcy-FlUDEKXN5Y/s320/280px-Bond_-_Sean_Connery_-_Profile.jpg" height="320" width="274" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="line-height: 17px;"><i>Why do bad boys have all the fun?</i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">Researchers have argued that “dark
triad” traits may have evolved to facilitate short-term mating. Evidence for
this comes from a study which found that women rated men with dark triad traits
as having more attractive personalities than men who were low in these traits (Carter, Campbell, & Muncer). Another study
found that men who were high in psychopathic traits (one of the components of
the dark triad) were rated by female observers as being more physically
attractive than men who were low in these traits (Visser, Pozzebon, Bogaert, & Ashton, 2010). Perhaps, these
findings might help to explain why so many people are so fascinated by “dark” characters
both from fiction and real life. Casanova for example was not the most moral
person but he knew how to live in style!<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">What these findings suggest that the
traits associated with the slow life history strategy represent a “good”
personality in the traditional sense of being unselfish and of respecting society’s rules of
good behaviour </span><span style="line-height: 17px;">but</span><span style="line-height: 17px;"> </span><span style="line-height: 17px;">not in a global sense of being generally better implied by JP Rushton</span><span style="line-height: 107%;">. However, people who follow a slow strategy seem to be less
socially skilled and may not experience as much immediate pleasure as their more
selfish fast strategy counterparts, who are more focused on having a good time,
often at the expense of other people. One of the differences that emerged
between the two strategies, is that people with the slow style appear
over-controlled and lacking expressiveness, whereas those with the fast style
are more lively and impulsive. This suggests that one of the key differences may
be in how much people inhibit expression of their impulses. Some people may be
overly concerned with not doing anything that might give offense to others,
whereas other people are more focused on expressing themselves, being less
anxious about what other people might think.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">The findings from Sherman et al.
suggest that neither a fast nor a slow life history strategy is associated with
a complete set of desirable traits that a general factor of personality would
entail. In my previous post, I suggested that a general factor of personality
might not represent a unitary dimension underlying all personality traits, but
instead a particular cluster of separate traits combined in a way that
maximises a person’s well-being. Perhaps this entails a personality type that
can strike a balance between the conflicting demands of expressing the self on
the one hand and exercising the self-control needed to comply with social
expectations and rules for getting along with other people. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><b><i>Footnote</i></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><b><i><br /></i></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 17px;">[1] Another minor difference from the Big Five is that in the HEXACO model neuroticism is replaced with “emotionality”. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"> </span><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Please consider following me on </span></i></b><a href="https://www.facebook.com/UniqueLikeEverybodyElse"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Facebook,</span></i></b></a>
<a href="https://plus.google.com/b/116570783533948602312/116570783533948602312/posts"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Google
Plus</span></i></b></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">, or </span></i></b><a href="https://twitter.com/ScottAMcGreal" target="_blank"><em><b><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Twitter</span></b></em></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">.</span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; color: blue; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">This article also appears on Psychology Today on
my blog </span><a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201310/personality-s-big-one-revisited-the-allure-the-dark-side" style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;" target="_blank">Unique - Like Everybody Else</a><span style="background-color: white; color: blue; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: blue; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: red; font-family: Arial, sans-serif;">© Scott McGreal. Please do not reproduce without permission. Brief excerpts may be quoted as long as a link to the original article is provided. </span><span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: '', sans-serif, '', serif; line-height: 107%;">Any v</span><span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; line-height: 107%;">ersion of
this article appearing on sites other than Eye on Psych</span> <span style="color: red; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">or my blog at
Psychology Today has been ripped off without my consent.</span><br />
<span style="color: red; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<b>Further reading: </b><br />
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201411/what-is-intelligent-personality" style="line-height: 17.1200008392334px;">What is an Intelligent Personality?</a><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 17.1200008392334px;"> - discusses the relationship between personality and various concepts of intelligence, particularly in regard to claims that a general factor of personality is correlated with general intelligence. </span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><b>Image Credits</b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="http://dualspades.deviantart.com/art/Darth-Vader-133289366" target="_blank">Darth Vader</a> by Dualspades at DeviantArt</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Sacrifice poster created at <a href="http://diy.despair.com/">http://diy.despair.com/</a> using image from <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/87509590@N00/4033448202/" target="_blank">Flickr</a></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Sean Connery as James Bond from <a href="http://jamesbond.wikia.com/wiki/Sean_Connery" target="_blank">Wikia</a></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"> <b>References</b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Carter, G. L., Campbell, A. C., &
Muncer, S. The Dark Triad personality: Attractiveness to women. <i>Personality and Individual Differences</i>(0).
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.08.021<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Jonason, P. K., Li, N. P., & Teicher,
E. A. (2010). Who is James Bond? The Dark Triad as an Agentic Social Style.<i> Individual Differences Research, 8</i>(2),
111-120. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Musek, J. (2007). A general factor of
personality: Evidence for the Big One in the five-factor model. <i>Journal of Research in Personality, 41</i>(6),
1213-1233. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Rushton, J. P., & Irwing, P. (2011).
<a href="http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/2011%20Rushton%20&%20Irwing.pdf" target="_blank">The General Factor of Personality: Normal and Abnormal</a>. In T. Chamorro-Premuzic,
S. v. Stumm & A. Furnham (Eds.), <i>The
Wiley-Blackwell Handbook of Individual Differences</i> ( First ed.): Blackwell
Publishing Ltd.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
<span class="Z3988" title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+personality+and+social+psychology&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F23915038&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fresearchblogging.org&rft.atitle=The+behavioral+correlates+of+overall+and+distinctive+life+history+strategy.&rft.issn=0022-3514&rft.date=2013&rft.volume=105&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=873&rft.epage=88&rft.artnum=&rft.au=Sherman+RA&rft.au=Figueredo+AJ&rft.au=Funder+DC&rfe_dat=bpr3.included=1;bpr3.tags=Psychology%2CPersonality%2C+Intelligence%2C+Evolutionary+Psychology">Sherman RA, Figueredo AJ, & Funder DC (2013). The behavioral correlates of overall and distinctive life history strategy. <span style="font-style: italic;">Journal of personality and social psychology, 105</span> (5), 873-88 PMID: <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23915038" rev="review">23915038</a></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Visser, B. A., Pozzebon, J. A., Bogaert, A.
F., & Ashton, M. C. (2010). Psychopathy, sexual behavior, and esteem: It’s
different for girls. <i>Personality and
Individual Differences, 48</i>(7), 833-838. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.02.008<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Scott McGrealhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13757633582829269183noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2304269645366413372.post-9986933077129667672013-12-05T17:07:00.001+11:002013-12-19T19:12:38.901+11:00Atheism, Openness to Experience and Dogmatism: A Puzzling Relationship<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 17px;"><span style="float: left; padding: 5px;"><a href="http://www.researchblogging.org/"><img alt="ResearchBlogging.org" src="http://www.researchblogging.org/public/citation_icons/rb2_large_gray.png" style="border: 0;" /></a></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">Dogmatism
has usually been related in research to low levels of <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/opening-the-mind-where-skepticism-and-superstition-meet" target="_blank">openness to experience</a>, a
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201211/personalitys-big-one-reality-or-artifact" target="_blank">personality</a> dimension associated with interest in new and non-traditional
ideas. Dogmatism has mostly been studied in relation to religious beliefs but
some recent research has looked at dogmatism among non-religious people. One
surprising finding was that among self-identified atheists, higher levels of
openness to experience were actually associated with greater dogmatism,
contrary to the usual pattern. This suggests that the personality dimension openness
to experience might not be a marker of open-mindedness as such but more of a
preference for unconventional and complex ideas. Perhaps there needs to be a
distinction made between humble versus arrogant forms of openness to
experience.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi_b9kwWN9M9rf_VB6Ive0eV8Eg4g8sHR-q-neUCND8h9UkKHnGzUxAdQtLrecFOTx2ouTJcob5FovnxuVAf2yR3ZXWhqQHUA_jushfzT8Jjh2lHoB6QZfCpjDNCPunDQQ1gQPQ_m5pK-8/s1600/dogmatism+poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><img border="0" height="244" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi_b9kwWN9M9rf_VB6Ive0eV8Eg4g8sHR-q-neUCND8h9UkKHnGzUxAdQtLrecFOTx2ouTJcob5FovnxuVAf2yR3ZXWhqQHUA_jushfzT8Jjh2lHoB6QZfCpjDNCPunDQQ1gQPQ_m5pK-8/s320/dogmatism+poster.jpg" width="320" /></span></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><i>Some people do not respond well to disagreement. </i></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">Dogmatism
refers to rigid certainty about the correctness of one’s views, along with
refusal to consider alternatives and a conviction that any intelligent person
who has thought things through would agree with one’s own opinions. The
opposite of this is the willingness to consider that one’s own views are not
the only reasonable way of looking at things and that it is possible that one
could be proven wrong. This does not mean that a non-dogmatic person must be
wishy-washy, only that they are willing to consider that other people might
have good reasons for believing what they do and that it is alright for
intelligent people to disagree.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">Dogmatism and
openness to experience: polar opposites?<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">People
can be dogmatic about any subject, e.g. political and lifestyle views, but
dogmatism has mostly been studied among religious believers. Religious beliefs
in general tend to be held more dogmatically than other kinds of beliefs, and people
with fundamentalist beliefs are generally the most dogmatic of all, virtually
by definition. Not surprisingly, religious fundamentalism tends to be
associated with low openness to experience (Saroglou,
2010). Openness to experience is a broad and somewhat heterogeneous
dimension of personality that refers to the breadth and complexity of a
person’s mental life (McCrae & Sutin, 2009).
</span><span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU;">People low in openness to
experience tend to prefer rather black-and-white views of the world that are
not too complex or intellectually demanding. In contrast, people high in
openness prefer more nuanced ways of looking at things, and feel comfortable
with complex ideas. Openness to experience </span><span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">encompasses a diverse number of narrower traits, and one
of these traits, openness to values, refers to readiness to “re-examine social,
political and religious values” and has even been considered to represent “the
opposite of dogmatism” (Costa & McCrae, 1992, cited in) (Smith, Johnson, & Hathaway, 2009). <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">Some atheists
can’t stand disagreement</span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 106%;">
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="line-height: 107%;">While
it seems generally true that people high in openness to experience,
particularly in the values facet, are least likely to be dogmatic, there may be
some notable exceptions. Re-examining traditional values, for example, does not
necessarily guarantee that one will not become tolerant of differences in
opinion. Some people might reject traditional values and then become dogmatic
adherents of non-traditional ones. One example that I believe fits this
description is an online movement called “<i>Atheism Plus”</i>. This movement,
which emerged just over a year ago in the atheist blogging community, bills
itself as a “positive” approach that aims to combine atheism/scepticism with a
variety of left-liberal political causes associated with the term “social
justice.” <a href="http://www.atheistrev.com/2012/08/reactions-to-atheism.html" target="_blank">Responses</a> to this movement in the atheist/sceptical community have been
less than totally positive. Atheism Plus has been<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><a href="http://www.atheistrev.com/2012/09/why-atheism-plus-is-perceived-as.html"><span style="line-height: 107%;">criticised</span></a><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="line-height: 107%;"> </span></span><span style="line-height: 107%;">by other atheists as a divisive movement, and a commonly
expressed concern is that members of this group have demonstrated intellectual
arrogance and <a href="http://www.theaunicornist.com/2012/08/atheism-just-digs-its-hole-deeper.html" target="_blank">intolerance</a> of <a href="http://www.atheistrev.com/2013/09/the-atheism-block-bot-vs-banning-books.html" target="_blank">dissent</a>, even on <a href="http://dead-logic.blogspot.com.au/2012/08/the-new-wave-of-atheism.html" target="_blank">minor</a> matters.</span><span style="font-size: x-small; line-height: 107%;">[1]</span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="line-height: 107%;"> </span></span><span style="line-height: 107%;">They would seem to be high in openness to values yet appear
very dogmatic in their views. A recent research study may sheds some light on
when and why high openness to experience and dogmatism sometimes go together.</span><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 106%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 106%;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 106%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhs8SklomYVx9djRPtli_umDZSvOdI6QgOA8ZDpPTcgyquKg9fzRZuS6PuEb00mEiXjBIb8N0_fAPiSvbgtvD8EOQZoMPNprDvfxqvWKnuKTfnxxcJ4Z1zPc2bP9LxMeHgG9U8k1a9GMyQ/s1600/Ydoa.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><img border="0" height="280" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhs8SklomYVx9djRPtli_umDZSvOdI6QgOA8ZDpPTcgyquKg9fzRZuS6PuEb00mEiXjBIb8N0_fAPiSvbgtvD8EOQZoMPNprDvfxqvWKnuKTfnxxcJ4Z1zPc2bP9LxMeHgG9U8k1a9GMyQ/s400/Ydoa.jpg" width="400" /></span></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 106%; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 106%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 16px;"><i>Parody of Atheism Plus. See <a href="http://www.skepticink.com/avant-garde/2012/10/13/atheism-plus-we-are-atheists/" target="_blank">here</a> for another good parody.</i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 16px;"><br /></span></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">Dogmatism and
openness to experience among the non-religious<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">Studies
on non-religious people have found that they are generally considerably higher
in openness to experience than those who are religious (Galen & Kloet, 2011). People who are non-religious vary
greatly in how they define their lack of religiosity so it can be useful to make
broad distinctions. A recent study did this by comparing people with “no
beliefs in particular” (which I will call “nones” for convenience) and those
self-identifying as atheists (Gurney, McKeown,
Churchyard, & Howlett, 2013). Those who describe themselves as
atheists are more likely to identify themselves as members of a specific group,
whereas nones have no particular group identity. Membership of a group tends to
promote a sense of loyalty to the values of the group along with a sense of
separateness from outsiders, and this can foster dogmatism about the beliefs
and values of one’s group to some extent. A distinguishing feature of an
atheist identity is that qualities associated with openness to experience, such
as challenging traditional beliefs and appreciation of intellectual activity,
are highly valued. This is in contrast to a religious identity, which is more
likely to emphasise conformity to tradition and submission to authority in
matters of belief. Individuals atheists vary in how central atheism is to their
identity overall. Some regard their atheism as simply an absence of belief in
gods, and one attitude among many others they may have. For others though, being
an atheist is a more central and defining part of their self-concept tied to
their core values, such as a belief in the social importance of scepticism and
reason. Gurney et al. therefore argued that insofar as atheists have a social
identity that values high openness to experience, dogmatism among them may be
positively correlated with openness to experience, as opposed to religious
social identities that devalue such openness. They performed a survey to
confirm this, so let’s look at what they found.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">The
survey compared a group of atheists, nones, and Christians on measures of
dogmatism and openness to experience. Additionally, atheists and Christians
were asked to rate how strongly they identified with their respective groups.
(Nones have no clear group membership, so this question would not be meaningful
to them.) The number of atheists in the sample (37) was on the small side, so
the study should be seen as a preliminary investigation rather than something
definitive. The measure of dogmatism (the DOG scale) used is content neutral in
that it includes generic statements like “</span><span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU;">The things I believe in are so completely true, I could never doubt
them” and “It is best to be open to all possibilities and ready to </span>evaluate
all your beliefs” (the latter indicates low dogmatism). The openness to
experience <a href="http://ipip.ori.org/newHEXACO_PI_key.htm">measure</a>
provides an overall score and scores on the <span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU;">subscales of inquisitiveness, aesthetic appreciation, creativity, and
unconventionality. The three groups scored similarly on overall openness,
although atheists scored significantly higher than Christians on inquisitiveness
and unconventionality. Considering atheists’ particular interests, this result
is as expected. The </span><span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">Inquisitiveness measure refers to intellectual curiosity, such as
interest in science, history and political discussion. Items used to measure it
also suggest that is particularly associated with intelligence, e.g. “have a
rich vocabulary” and “avoid difficult reading material” (the latter indicating
the low end of the trait). Unconventionality indicates non-conformity with
social expectations. </span><span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU;">Unconventionality
appears somewhat similar to openness to values as it includes items such as </span><span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">“rebel against authority”
and “swim against the current” but also includes several items referencing
unusual characteristics, e.g. being eccentric and odd, which may not be quite
as relevant to dogmatism though.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">On
the dogmatism measure, atheists did score slightly higher than nones, although
they were substantially lower than Christians. The graph below depicts
dogmatism scores for the three groups. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgAgaHTsgpuesNcneBQ0PdJmuBCq1_Z3D6DVKPtlc8PryFIhqLBs3e71sSnFQOBpttGjcCsWseL2Pal72wCthgxY7et4U3evrASuoAlLgbPiWoMqD9RkinyRnbKcalj3Lzep6PsNmAFg7Q/s1600/dogma+error+bars.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><img border="0" height="307" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgAgaHTsgpuesNcneBQ0PdJmuBCq1_Z3D6DVKPtlc8PryFIhqLBs3e71sSnFQOBpttGjcCsWseL2Pal72wCthgxY7et4U3evrASuoAlLgbPiWoMqD9RkinyRnbKcalj3Lzep6PsNmAFg7Q/s400/dogma+error+bars.png" width="400" /></span></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 17px;"><i>Dogmatism levels among atheists, nones and Christians. Error bars represent standard deviations.</i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">Dogmatism
was also positively correlated with group identification in both atheists and
Christians. That is the more strongly a person identified as either an atheist
or a Christian, the more dogmatic they were about their respective beliefs. So
atheists who do not attach much significance to their unbelief were less rigid
in their views than those who see atheism as more central to their identity. Additionally
and as expected, correlations between dogmatism and openness to experience
differed among the three groups. Dogmatism was negatively correlated with
openness to experience among nones, and to a lesser extent among Christians. In
the latter group, inquisitiveness in particular was significantly negatively
correlated with dogmatism, indicating that among Christians, the more dogmatic
they were, the less interest they had in intellectual pursuits. This pattern
was reversed among atheists, as overall openness to experience, and the facets
of </span><span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU;">inquisitiveness,
unconventionality, and creativity were positively associated with dogmatism.
That is, atheists who considered themselves more intellectual, more
non-traditional, and more creative even, were more dogmatically certain about
the correctness of their views and presumably less tolerant of dissenting ones.
<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU;"><br /></span></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU;">Open to experience does not
always mean open-minded<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU;">The
association among atheists between higher dogmatism and higher openness to experience,
especially the inquisitiveness facet, is in a way rather surprising. As
previously noted, people high in inquisitiveness are comfortable with complex
concepts so would be expected to have the cognitive flexibility to steer away
from black-and-white thinking usually associated with dogmatism. They also tend
to express an interest in science, and one of the guiding principles of science
is that one should be willing to question one’s preferred theories rather than
cling to them rigidly. Nevertheless, even great scientists sometimes become
overly attached to their pet theories and may defend them dogmatically. Furthermore,
the unconventionality scale refers to being an unusual person with off-beat
ideas but says nothing about the flexibility or rigidity of one’s beliefs. Perhaps
it would be fair to say that high openness to experience indicates a preference
for complex and unusual ideas, but this does not always mean that one will not be
receptive to challenges to these ideas. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU;"><br /></span></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU;">Intellectual arrogance versus
intellectual humility<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU;">Another
possibility is that there are different varieties of openness to experience
that might be relevant to whether or not a person is dogmatic. Openness to
experience comprises a broad array of traits, some of which combine features of
openness with traits from other distinctive personality dimensions (Johnson, 1994). For example, openness combined
with introversion defines the trait of introspectiveness, whereas openness
combined with extraversion defines a preference for variety and originality. Dogmatism
implies a lack of humility about the rightness of one’s views, an arrogant
assumption that one cannot possibly wrong and that anyone who disagrees is
either stupid or evil. There does not appear to be any research that has
explored what a combination of high openness to experience with low humility
might be, but it sounds like this combination of traits would describe
intellectual arrogance. Perhaps openness to experience in atheists who are also
dogmatic involves a blend of unconventionality and lack of humility that
facilitates an unusual form of dogmatism. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh4RbMAPwGn64sh5ca9oMp6rLnW-YQ9tMPM3_-S-32vof72xh1oIwAy7B-NNcBxzh91eJJgOM7lTp9ni7WOT9q0qqPy4nN0MxuXhnguqZIVo6Um0HnHztuNz6BaW7OjQM-7TAwf2ucC2Pk/s1600/atheism_motivational_poster_2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh4RbMAPwGn64sh5ca9oMp6rLnW-YQ9tMPM3_-S-32vof72xh1oIwAy7B-NNcBxzh91eJJgOM7lTp9ni7WOT9q0qqPy4nN0MxuXhnguqZIVo6Um0HnHztuNz6BaW7OjQM-7TAwf2ucC2Pk/s400/atheism_motivational_poster_2.jpg" width="400" /></span></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU;"><i>Well, I can think of much more arrogant beliefs...</i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU;">A
limitation of the Gurney et al. study was that it did not address whether
identity strength (how strongly a person identified as an atheist) and openness
to experience were equally important as predictors of dogmatism or whether one
was more crucial than the other. That is, does openness to experience still
predict dogmatism in atheists when taking into account identity strength or
does it become non-significant? Or conversely, does identity strength still
predict dogmatism when taking openness to experience into account? This could
be tested statistically with a larger sample of atheists. A more difficult
question to answer is why some people have a stronger atheist identity than
others. There was a positive correlation between identity strength and openness
to experience. Do people identify more strongly as atheists because they are high
in openness to experience or does having a strong identity increase openness to
experience? And what is the relationship, if any between low humility and
identity strength? Does adopting a strong identity lead to an arrogant
dismissive attitude towards people who disagree (which I believe to be a
problem with Atheism Plus)? Or is it the case that arrogant people are drawn to
a polarizing identity? Perhaps it is a combination of both, where adopting such
an identity reinforces pre-existing tendencies towards arrogance? Longitudinal
research studies would be needed to answer these questions. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU;">I want to
make it clear that I have no problem with people having a strong atheist
identity, or even people combining atheism with particular political views or
an interest in social justice. What I am concerned about is when people hold
their views in a dogmatic and arrogant manner. One Atheism Plus blogger </span><a href="http://www.freezepage.com/1379820000XADVKHQSPW"><span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU;">claimed</span></a></span><span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
that atheism implies not just disbelief in gods but a view of reality in which
highly specific political and economic beliefs are to be regarded as certain
and inconvertible truths. Even in the hard sciences, theories are open to
debate, so I find it incredible he would claim to have certain knowledge in
highly complex and soft disciplines where experts disagree. I think it is
definitely possible for people to have strong well-defined views about things
and yet also realise that their own beliefs are ultimately provisional and
subject to change according to new evidence. Finally I want to acknowledge that
I am aware of many good examples of atheist bloggers<span style="font-size: x-small;">[2]</span> who do acknowledge that
people who disagree with them are not necessarily stupid or evil and who do
understand the meaning of being reasonable.
</span><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU;"><br /></span></div>
<hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" />
<div id="ftn1">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 13px;">[1]</span></span></span> Well known blogger <a href="http://www.theaunicornist.com/2012/12/feminism-patriarchy-pz-myers-and-other.html" target="_blank">PZ Myers</a> <a href="http://www.freezepage.com/1379820000XADVKHQSPW">stated</a> for example that critics of Atheism Plus should call themselves “asshole atheists.” He is also notorious for banning <a href="http://noelplum99.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/pz-myers-demonstration-of-entitlement.html" target="_blank">dissenting</a> <a href="http://www.michaelnugent.com/2013/11/26/richard-dawkins-nuanced-memoir-and-the-unjust-personal-smears-against-him/" target="_blank">commenters</a> from his blog, among <a href="http://www.atheistrev.com/2013/08/more-internet-vigilantism-as-shermer.html" target="_blank">other things</a>. </span></div>
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">[2] </span>For example, <a href="http://triangulations.wordpress.com/" target="_blank">Triangulations</a>, <a href="http://www.atheistrev.com/" target="_blank">Atheist Revolution</a>, and <a href="http://www.theaunicornist.com/" target="_blank">The A-Unicornist</a> have all been non-dogmatic in my experience. </span></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU;"><br /></span>
<span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b>Note on layout: </b>Please accept my apologies for any inconsistencies in the appearance of the text. Blogger does strange and unpredictable things to text copied from Word.</span> </span><br />
<span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Please consider following me on </span></i></b><a href="https://www.facebook.com/UniqueLikeEverybodyElse"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Facebook,</span></i></b></a>
<a href="https://plus.google.com/b/116570783533948602312/116570783533948602312/posts"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Google
Plus</span></i></b></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">, or </span></i></b><a href="https://twitter.com/ScottAMcGreal"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Twitter</span></i></b></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">© Scott McGreal. Please do not reproduce without
permission. Brief excerpts may be quoted as long as a link to the original
article is provided. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">This article also appears on Psychology Today on
my blog <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201309/dogmatism-and-openness-experience-in-the-non-religious"><b>Unique
- Like Everybody Else</b></a>.</span><span style="color: red;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU;">Other posts about the psychology of (non-)belief<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU;"><br /></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/reason-versus-faith-the-interplay-intuition-and-rationality-in-sup">Reason
versus Faith? The Interplay of Intuition and Rationality in Supernatural Belief</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/opening-the-mind-where-skepticism-and-superstition-meet">Opening
the Mind: Where Skepticism and Superstition Meet</a><span class="MsoHyperlink"> </span><span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201305/belief-in-god-supports-prejudice-against-gays-and-atheists">Belief in God Supports Prejudice against Gays and Atheists</a><span style="color: #333333; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-AU; mso-font-kerning: 18.0pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201310/what-oprah-doesnt-understand-about-awe-and-atheists" target="_blank">What Oprah doesn’t Understand about Awe and Atheists</a> </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">Image credits<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">Snarling dog image care of </span><a href="http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/03/09/article-1256770-07998653000005DC-694_468x286.jpg"><span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">The Daily Telegraph</span></a><span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Poster created at <a href="http://diy.despair.com/">http://diy.despair.com/</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">The
creator of the A+ parody is currently unknown. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">Atheism
galaxy poster from </span><a href="http://atheistpictures.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/atheism_motivational_poster_2.jpg"><span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">Atheist Pictures</span></a><span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">References <o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Galen, L. W., & Kloet, J. (2011).
Personality and Social Integration Factors Distinguishing Nonreligious from
Religious Groups: The Importance of Controlling for Attendance and
Demographics. <i>Archive for the Psychology
of Religion, 33</i>(2), 205-228. doi: 10.1163/157361211x570047<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
<span class="Z3988" title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.jtitle=Personality+and+Individual+Differences&rft_id=info%3Adoi%2F10.1016%2Fj.paid.2013.07.471&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fresearchblogging.org&rft.atitle=Believe+it+or+not%3A+Exploring+the+relationship+between+dogmatism+and+openness+within+non-religious+samples&rft.issn=&rft.date=2013&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.epage=&rft.artnum=http%3A%2F%2Fdx.doi.org%2F10.1016%2Fj.paid.2013.07.471&rft.au=Gurney%2C+D.+J.&rft.au=McKeown%2C+S.&rft.au=Churchyard%2C+J.&rft.au=Howlett%2C+N.&rfe_dat=bpr3.included=1;bpr3.tags=Psychology%2CPersonality%2C+Religion%2C+Dogmatism%2C+Atheism">Gurney, D. J., McKeown, S., Churchyard, J., & Howlett, N. (2013). Believe it or not: Exploring the relationship between dogmatism and openness within non-religious samples <span style="font-style: italic;">Personality and Individual Differences</span> DOI: <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.07.471" rev="review">10.1016/j.paid.2013.07.471</a></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Johnson, J. A. (1994). Clarification of
Factor Five with the help of the AB5C Model. <i>European Journal of Personality, 8</i>(4), 311-334. doi:
10.1002/per.2410080408<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
McCrae, R., & Sutin, A. R. (2009).
Openness to Experience. In R. H. H. Mark R. Leary (Ed.), <i>Handbook of Individual Differences in Social Behavior</i> (pp.
257-273). New York/London: The Guildford Press.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Saroglou, V. (2010). Religiousness as a
Cultural Adaptation of Basic Traits: A Five-Factor Model Perspective. <i>Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14</i>(1),
108-125. doi: 10.1177/1088868309352322<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Smith, C. L., Johnson, J. L., &
Hathaway, W. (2009). Personality Contributions to Belief in Paranormal
Phenomena. <i>Individual Differences
Research, 7</i>(2), 85-96.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div>
<br />
<div id="ftn1">
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div id="ftn1">
</div>
</div>
Scott McGrealhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13757633582829269183noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2304269645366413372.post-27130424335015534992013-11-30T22:19:00.000+11:002019-10-02T11:33:35.115+10:00The Forgotten Role of Individual Differences in the Stanford Prison Experiment<div class="MsoNormal">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>The Stanford Prison Experiment did NOT show that strong situations overpower personality.</i></div>
<span style="float: left; padding: 5px;"><a href="http://www.researchblogging.org/"><img alt="ResearchBlogging.org" src="http://www.researchblogging.org/public/citation_icons/rb2_large_gray.png" style="border: 0;" /></a></span><br />
The Stanford Prison experiment (SPE) is one of the most
famous, or indeed infamous, studies in the history of psychology. The dramatic
and horrifying result of the SPE have been used to draw rather sweeping
conclusions about human nature and the psychology of evil. For example, the SPE
supposedly illustrates the power of an abusive situation to induce good people
to do evil things. In particular, Phil Zimbardo has argued that the study shows
that strong situational forces can override individual differences in
personality and moral values so that the latter count for very little. Indeed
he has even <a href="http://talesfromthelou.wordpress.com/2013/03/07/philip-zimbardo-why-do-good-people-do-evil-things/">claimed</a>
that virtually anybody at all who was put into a situation where they had power
over others, such as guards have over prisoners, would act in a tyrannical and
abusive way. Furthermore, the results of the SPE have been applied to prisoner
abuse in Abu Ghraib. The influence of the SPE on psychology is
all the more remarkable considering the obvious limitations of the study, such
as its small sample size and the ad hoc way in which the experiment was
conducted. Closer examination shows that the design of the SPE did not provide
an adequate test of the role of individual differences in a simulated prison,
and that no satisfactory account of the individual differences in behaviour
shown by participants has been offered. Therefore, the popularly accepted
conclusion that the SPE shows that “situational power triumphs over individual
power in certain contexts” (Zimbardo, 2007)
is quite unfounded. <o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEioNGD4shvY_oTH-54RWQks_grcfJg9M7JdUY09NYCcTBQoAQsGF12WKkt-nQtUZYFmRqWOkCV2SSINXqY7qp6i-VMmQPvH6tXjgao8ZzsqF_JO2Pz7atp0-uAHtrZ2D1u5-e66la_wMYE/s1600/AbuGhraibAbuse-standing-on-box.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEioNGD4shvY_oTH-54RWQks_grcfJg9M7JdUY09NYCcTBQoAQsGF12WKkt-nQtUZYFmRqWOkCV2SSINXqY7qp6i-VMmQPvH6tXjgao8ZzsqF_JO2Pz7atp0-uAHtrZ2D1u5-e66la_wMYE/s320/AbuGhraibAbuse-standing-on-box.jpg" width="240" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; line-height: 11px;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib has been compared to events at Stanford. What are the real lessons? </span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><strong style="background-color: white; line-height: 20px; text-align: start;">Dispositions vs. situations</strong><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 20px; text-align: start;"> </span><strong style="background-color: white; line-height: 20px; text-align: start;">- opposed or complementary?</strong></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The details of the
SPE are fairly well-known and are explained in detail on Zimbardo’s <a href="http://www.prisonexp.org/">website</a>. Susan Krauss Whitbourne also
provides a nice accessible summary of the study on her <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/fulfillment-any-age/201307/the-rarely-told-true-story-zimbardo-s-prison-experiment">blog</a><a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/fulfillment-any-age/201307/the-rarely-told-true-story-zimbardo-s-prison-experiment"></a>.
When the study was first published, the stated rationale was to critique the
“dispositional hypothesis” of why prison life is so deplorable (Haney, Banks, & Zimbardo, 1973). Briefly,
the “dispositional hypothesis” supposedly blames the “nature” of the people who
administer the prison system (e.g. the guards) and the “nature” of the people
who populate it (the prisoners). That is, when guards act in a brutal manner it
is because they are brutal people. Alternatively, prisoners are seen as
naturally aggressive people unable to control their impulses, and therefore
repressive measures are needed to control them. According to Haney et al., this
dispositional hypothesis has been invoked both by those who defend the status
quo (poor conditions in prisons are due to evil prisoners) and by critics of
the system (poor conditions in prisons are due to sadistic guards). Supposedly,
such simplistic explanations draw attention away from the complex social,
economic, and political causes that really underlie this deplorable situation,
and which are too difficult to change without radical social upheaval. A few
years ago, a research paper proposed that self-selection might have influenced
the outcomes of the SPE, because the sort of people who would willingly
volunteer for a study on prison life might have distinctive personality traits
that might predispose them to abusive behaviour (Carnahan
& McFarland, 2007).<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;">[1]</span></span></span><!--[endif]--></span>
Haney and Zimbardo <span style="font-family: "sabon-roman" , "serif"; line-height: 107%;">(2009)</span><span style="font-family: "sabon-roman" , "serif"; line-height: 107%;"> </span>responded
to this by attacking the influence of what they call “persistent
dispositionalism” in psychology – “<span style="font-family: "sabon-roman" , "serif"; line-height: 107%;">explaining
context-driven socially problematic behavior in largely individualistic,
trait-based terms, no matter how much evidence has been amassed to the
contrary”. <o:p></o:p></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "sabon-roman" , "serif"; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "sabon-roman" , "serif"; line-height: 107%;">The
alternative hypothesis that Haney et al. present is a “situationist” one, which
is the claim that powerful and oppressive social situational forces, such as
occur in a prison, </span>over-ride individual differences in personality and
moral values, and induce ordinary decent people to act in abhorrent ways. Haney
et al. (1973) attacked the idea that prisoner abuse is due to “bad seeds” and
alternatively suggested that the prison system consists instead of “bad soil”
that can corrupt anyone. In a more recent <a href="http://archive.is/84zbt" target="_blank">talk</a>,
Zimbardo has explained his belief about prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib “I believed our soldiers were good apples that someone had put into a very bad barrel in that prison dungeon.”<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqVxvymTXGtpAykTcixZbX3Fy3P7pF3QSeVtn_LP7u7vy1vXva5UmOQA7LIWykzRkUl9MMojeZtx_gSVa0omL8u_uyLrO5tKUeDfbb4vUk5YFbCZxYtKzRGWabwT0EtfKq9mxSB69EF_g/s1600/prisoner+abuse.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="133" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqVxvymTXGtpAykTcixZbX3Fy3P7pF3QSeVtn_LP7u7vy1vXva5UmOQA7LIWykzRkUl9MMojeZtx_gSVa0omL8u_uyLrO5tKUeDfbb4vUk5YFbCZxYtKzRGWabwT0EtfKq9mxSB69EF_g/s400/prisoner+abuse.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib: good apples in a bad barrel? Did they not choose to behave the way they did? </span></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>Personality is revealed rather than suppressed by situations</b></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: #333333; font-family: "georgia" , "serif"; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Note the apparent dichotomy here. A person’s behaviour in a
situation such as a mock prison or even a real one is supposed to be due either
to their internal dispositions or the external features of the situation, but
not both. I think this a false dichotomy that has led to extreme and unfounded
conclusions. Furthermore, it appears to be a straw man argument. When
Haney et al. (1973) originally discussed the “dispositional hypothesis” they
did not cite any references to show that this is a real hypothesis taken
seriously by any genuine scholars. Perhaps certain naïve laypeople believe in
it, but whether actual social scientists and psychologists do is not clear.
Similarly, when Haney and Zimbardo (2009) attack “persistent dispositionalism”
they seem to invoke a decades-old misconception that personality psychologists
believe that behaviour can be understood primarily as a function of a person’s
traits without serious consideration of the context of the person’s behaviour.
On the contrary, personality psychologists have long maintained that a person’s
behaviour is a function of <i>both</i> the
features of the person and the features of the situation, not just one or the
other. That is, personality psychologists argue that people generally
make choices about how to behave in order to meet their needs within the
constraints and opportunities inherent in particular situations.<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;">[2]</span></span></span><!--[endif]--></span>
Regarding the SPE in particular, the authors who argued that self-selection
could have influenced the SPE’s outcome responded to the criticism of Haney and
Zimbardo that they supposedly preferred “dispositionalist” explanations over
situational ones, by acknowledging that features of
the situation had a powerful influence on the behaviour of the participants (McFarland & Carnahan, 2009). What they
were arguing was that traits might influence a person’s decision to participate
in such a situation in the first place. Furthermore, they also argued that
being in such a situation with people with similar personality traits would
tend to amplify whatever tendencies one already had to be abusive. However,
Zimbardo (2007) has argued for a more
extreme situationist view, claiming that “a large body of evidence in social
psychology supports the concept that situational power triumphs over individual
power in certain contexts” and that bad situations can cause “good” people to
do “evil” things. However an alternative view of the power of situations is
that they provide opportunities that can reveal rather than suppress individual
differences (Krueger, 2008). That is, put
two different people with different desires in the same situation, and they will respond in accordance with their personal preferences, within whatever
constraints are imposed by the demands of the situation. Let’s examine the
actual findings of the SPE and see which view of situational power finds more
support. <o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>What really happened at Stanford</b></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The SPE study sample consisted of 21<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;">[3]</span></span></span><!--[endif]--></span>
men who had been selected from a large pool of 75 volunteers based on
psychological assessments to ensure their mental stability and lack of criminal
history. One day prior to the study these 21 were assessed on ten different
personality trait tests and then randomly assigned to the role of guard or
prisoner – 11 to the former, 10 to the latter. On the whole it seems, the
guards were pretty mean, and the prisoners became demoralised by their
situation, and five of the latter had such adverse psychological reactions that
they had to be released early. So far, sounds like a big win for the
situationist account right? Participants acted the way they did based on their
situationally defined roles, so the situation had a strong influence on their
behaviour. However, I don’t think anyone is actually denying that situations
influence behaviour. Zimbardo’s claim is that “situational power triumphs over
individual power.” If this was the case, then we would expect that there was
little or no variation in the way participants behaved in their respective
roles as prisoners or guards. Did this really happen though?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
According to the original report by Haney et al. there actually were notable
individual differences in how the prisoners and guards behaved. <o:p></o:p><br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 5.0pt; margin-left: 1.0cm; margin-right: 1.0cm; margin-top: 5.0pt;">
“Some guards were tough but fair (“played by the rules”), some went far
beyond their roles to engage in creative cruelty and harassment, while a few
were passive and rarely instigated any coercive control over the prisoners” (p.
81). <o:p></o:p></div>
Apparently about a third of the guards (so about 3 or 4) were actively
cruel, while those described as “passive” by Haney et al. have been described <a href="http://www.angelfire.com/or/sociologyshop/frozim.html">elsewhere</a> as “good guards from the prisoner’s
point of view since they did them small favors and were friendly”. Furthermore,
although five prisoners broke down under the stress of being abused, the other
five were more resilient. <o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNaPjoI3ctJMZ_7CVOZrqY66D0GnVkWGAPS_m3Rj4pr59dstd910u9CK7xE4OEQNE3DdBv9cX_0DVSj_1swyvUhDuA-UxENs6332rqckYLg3-qxDOIlisdl3KT3EbNVZkDaNAcocXCdDc/s1600/spe.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNaPjoI3ctJMZ_7CVOZrqY66D0GnVkWGAPS_m3Rj4pr59dstd910u9CK7xE4OEQNE3DdBv9cX_0DVSj_1swyvUhDuA-UxENs6332rqckYLg3-qxDOIlisdl3KT3EbNVZkDaNAcocXCdDc/s320/spe.jpg" width="273" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Clothes make the man? (<a href="http://www.brainpickings.org/index.php/2011/08/17/stanford-prison-experiment-40/" target="_blank">Image Source</a>)</span></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>The role of personality traits - at first acknowledged, then later dismissed</b></div>
<br />
The original report by Haney et al. does acknowledge that personality traits
could moderate the effect of social situational variables, allaying or
intensifying the latter’s effects. That is, individual differences in
participants could influence how they respond to the perceived demands of their
assigned role. When discussing the limitations of their study they even go so
far as to admit that they could not adequately test whether a dispositional or
a situational account provides a better explanation of their results and state
that “We cannot say that personality differences do not have an important
effect on behavior in situations such as the one reported here.” They
acknowledge that a stronger test would involve comparing two conditions where
participants were pre-selected for having more extreme personality traits. I
suppose one way to do this would to set up two mock prisons for comparison, one
featuring people selected for above-average kindness and compassion, the other
one populated only with narcissists and psychopaths. If there were no
differences in the behaviour shown in the two conditions (!) this would provide
strong evidence that personality traits are not an important influence on
behaviour in such a situation. However, they lacked the resources to perform
such an experiment, which (hardly surprisingly) has not been done to this day. <o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
In their more recent article though, Haney and Zimbardo (2009) summarily dismissed the role of
individual differences, arguing that the precautions and controls they used in
their original study were sufficient to lay to rest “<i>any</i> trait-based
explanations of our findings” (emphasis added). Specifically, participants were assessed on a
number of personality traits and found to score within the normal range for the
general population. Additionally, guards and prisoners did not differ on any of
these traits. And finally, these personality measures did not predict
variations in behaviour within either the prisoner group or the guard group.
Supposedly, these precautions should be enough to settle the matter for good. <o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
On its face, such an assertion that the results from a single study of 21
people can permanently lay to rest “any” trait-based explanations seems to me
like a breathtakingly bold dismissal that flies in the face of usual scientific
practice. Such a small single study like this would normally be considered by
most scientists just the beginning of enquiry into the matter not the end of
it. Haney and Zimbardo offer no explanation of why individual differences
occurred in people who were exposed to the same situation, yet claim that they
have enough evidence to dismiss “any” trait-based explanation at all based on
their statistical analysis of 21 people. Let’s examine the merits of their
“precautions and controls.” <o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>Weak arguments about strong situations</b></div>
<br />
The first argument is that participants did not differ from the general
population on their personality traits, and were therefore a fair sample of
“normal” individuals. Eight of these measures comprised the Comrey Personality
scales. According to a critique by McFarland and Carnahan (2009) none of these traits have ever been
linked to abusive and aggressive behaviour. If this is correct, they would have
been of no use in assessing whether the participants were “normal” with respect
to their propensity to be abusive in a situation where they held power over
others. The other two traits measured were authoritarianism and
Machiavellianism (the propensity to manipulate others for one’s own gain),
which would appear to be theoretically relevant to abusive behaviour. The
original report by Haney et al. is actually silent on how their participants
compared to the normal population on these measures. For some reason that is
not made clear, the researchers used a non-standard scoring method for
Machiavellianism that makes comparisons with the general population not
possible. Carnahan and McFarland (2007)
pointed out that participants actually did score higher on authoritarianism
than the general population and their scores were actually comparable to those
found in a study of actual prisoners in San Quentin. Haney and Zimbardo argued
that the actual difference from the norm was fairly small, so whether it was
enough to contribute to the actual behaviour of participants in their study was
a moot point. Still, the matter has hardly been “laid to rest.” <o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
The second argument is that participants assigned to the prisoner and guard
roles did not differ significantly on their personality traits. Apart from the
miniscule sample size involved, which I will address shortly, I am tempted to
respond “So, what?” Prisoners and guards were effectively in two different
situations with differing opportunities and faced different challenges. For
example, some of the guards disturbed the prisoners’ sleep by banging on their
cell doors. The prisoners obviously did not have the opportunity to reciprocate
this treatment, because the guards went home at the end of their shifts. So the
prisoners could not engage in such abusive behaviour even if they had felt
inclined to do so, because the opportunity was simply not there. As I have
argued earlier, personality theorists propose that individual differences are
relevant to how people respond to their circumstances, not that individual
differences somehow allow people to transcend these circumstances and behave
however they feel like. <o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
Haney and Zimbardo’s third argument is that the behaviour of individuals
within their respective roles of prisoner or guard could not be predicted from
their personality scores. They do not deny that there were individual
differences in behaviour, just that they could not predict them. I think this
is their weakest argument of all. Remember that there were 11 guards and 10
prisoners. The guards’ behaviour in particular sorted them into three distinct
types – good guards, tough but fair, and mean guards. So this means that in
order to perform a statistical analysis we would have to compare three
subgroups consisting of 3 – 4 individuals to determine if there were
significant differences in their personality traits. Statistically this is
laughable. A basic principle of statistics is that significant differences
between groups can only be detected if the sample sizes are adequately large, and
the sample sizes in the SPE are so small as to be completely inadequate for the
purpose. Now, let’s say that I was a researcher who wanted to test the
hypothesis that individual differences in personality traits could predict
behaviour in an experimental situation such as an in a mock prison. (Let’s also
assume that I knew in advance what personality traits were relevant to the
outcomes concerned.) I could actually estimate in advance what sort of sample
size I would need in order to have a reasonable chance of finding a significant
result, if a real effect existed. Using a procedure known as power analysis, I can
calculate that if personality traits had a medium-sized effect on behaviour
(i.e. about average compared to most effects in psychology) resulting in three
different behavioural subgroups I would need about 50 or so participants per
subgroup (so 150 in total) to have an 80% chance of detecting a statistically
significant effect if one actually existed. Even if the effects of personality
were actually much larger than average, I would still need about 22
participants per subgroup, so 66 in total. Remember, that these numbers refer
only to the number of guards. Presumably we would need an equivalent number of
prisoners as well. This means that I could anticipate in advance that I would
need a sample of between 132 to 300 participants to have a reasonable chance of
getting a significant result. If for some reason I then decided to settle for a grand sample of 21 people - which would give me less than a 9% chance of finding a statistically significant result assuming a medium sized effect, and about a 15% chance assuming a large one - I would look rather foolish as such a tiny sample would not allow me to test my hypothesis in anything like a
conclusive way. Haney et al. quite obviously did not have anywhere near enough statistical power to predict individual behavior from measured personality traits, so the fact that they could not do so reflects a defect in their methodology rather than some deep truth about the power of situations to overwhelm individual differences.<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
In spite of these limitations, the original report on the SPE does note a
number of non-significant trends for personality traits to predict behaviour.
Specifically, prisoners who stayed until the end of the study, compared to the
five who left early, scored higher on extraversion, conformity, empathy, and
authoritarianism (Haney, et al., 1973). A
reasonable interpretation of this finding is that personality traits deserve
further investigation with a larger sample to determine if these trends are robust or not. Haney et al. admitted in 1973 that the SPE was not actually designed to test the hypothesis that personality traits would predict individual differences in behaviour. Yet in spite of these inadequacies in the study design, Haney and Zimbardo argued in 2009 that
“any trait-based explanations” of why participants behaved the way they did can
be dismissed without any further consideration. This seems disingenuous as well as unreasonable.<br />
<o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>Conclusions: the importance of choice</b></div>
In summary, the purpose of the SPE was supposed to be to demonstrate that
powerful situational forces could over-ride individual dispositions and
choices, leading good people to do bad things simply because of the role they
found themselves in. If this were true, then participants in the study should
have acted in a uniform way depending on their role. However, this was not the
case, participants acted like individuals, showing that they still had the
capacity to make choices within the constraints of their situations.
Furthermore, the study was not even designed to provide a fair assessment of
the influence of personality traits in such a situation because the sample size
was nowhere near large enough to justify any definite conclusions. Far from
demonstrating that individual differences do not matter in how people behave in
a strong situation, the study’s results illustrate that even in undeniably
tough situations people still have the capacity to make choices and that these
choices matter.<br />
<br />
<hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" />
<div id="ftn1">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; line-height: 13px;"><b>Footnotes</b></span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; line-height: 13px;"><b><br /></b></span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 13px;">[1]</span></span></span> This <a href="http://bps-research-digest.blogspot.com.au/2010/12/when-and-how-psychological-data-is.html">blog post</a> mentions some interesting results of this study regarding self-selection.<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn2">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 13px;">[2]</span></span></span> To be fair, Zimbardo has stated, for example on his <a href="http://thesituationist.wordpress.com/2007/07/">blog</a>, that be believes that behaviour is a function of both individual differences and situational factors. However, many of his published remarks indicate that he sees dispositional and situational factors as competing with each other to explain behaviour. Personality psychologists see this “competition” hypothesis as being based on a false dichotomy. See this <a href="http://funderstorms.wordpress.com/2013/09/05/dont-blame-milgram-2/">blog post</a> by David Funder for example for an explanation of why this dichotomy is not valid.<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn3">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 13px;">[3]</span></span></span> The sample was originally 24. Two were asked to remain on standby and one withdrew before the study began. </div>
</div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "arial" , "sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Please consider
following me on </span></i></b><a href="https://www.facebook.com/UniqueLikeEverybodyElse"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "arial" , "sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Facebook,</span></i></b></a> <a href="https://plus.google.com/b/116570783533948602312/116570783533948602312/posts"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "arial" , "sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Google Plus</span></i></b></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "arial" , "sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">, or </span></i></b><a href="https://twitter.com/ScottAMcGreal"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "arial" , "sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Twitter</span></i></b></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "arial" , "sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b><br />
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "arial" , "sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></i></b>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; color: black; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">
</div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; color: black; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "arial" , "sans-serif"; font-size: 10pt;">This article also appears on Psychology Today on my blog <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201309/individual-differences-in-the-stanford-prison-experiment">Unique - Like Everybody Else</a>.</span><span style="color: red;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "arial" , "sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "arial" , "sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;">© Scott McGreal. Please do not
reproduce without permission. Brief excerpts may be quoted as long as a link to
the original article is provided. Any v</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;"><span style="color: red;">ersion of this
article appearing on sites other than Eye on Psych or my blog at Psychology Today has been ripped off without my consent.</span></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "arial" , "sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<strong><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">Follow up articles critiquing situationism that discuss the SPE</span></strong></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">Challenging the "Banality" of Evil and of Heroism, <a data-mce-href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201404/challenging-the-banality-evil-and-heroism-part-1" href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201404/challenging-the-banality-evil-and-heroism-part-1" target="_blank">Part 1</a> and <a data-mce-href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201405/challenging-the-banality-evil-and-heroism-part-2" href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201405/challenging-the-banality-evil-and-heroism-part-2" target="_blank">Part 2</a>. This pair of articles refutes Zimbardo's claim that heroic and evil acts are equally "banal" outcomes of situational factors and that qualities within a person are of no real importance. </span><br />
<b><br /></b>
<b>Further interesting
reading <o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://funderstorms.wordpress.com/2013/09/05/dont-blame-milgram-2/">Don’t
blame Milgram</a> by David Funder – debunks the popular claim that Milgram’s
obedience studies show that the<span style="color: #373737;"><span style="line-height: 17px;"> <o:p></o:p>“power of the situation” overwhelms the “power of the person”.</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>References <o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
<span class="Z3988" title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.jtitle=Personality+%26+social+psychology+bulletin&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F17440210&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fresearchblogging.org&rft.atitle=Revisiting+the+Stanford+prison+experiment%3A+could+participant+self-selection+have+led+to+the+cruelty%3F&rft.issn=0146-1672&rft.date=2007&rft.volume=33&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=603&rft.epage=14&rft.artnum=&rft.au=Carnahan+T&rft.au=McFarland+S&rfe_dat=bpr3.included=1;bpr3.tags=Psychology%2CPersonality%2C+Social+Psychology">Carnahan T, & McFarland S (2007). Revisiting the Stanford prison experiment: could participant self-selection have led to the cruelty? <span style="font-style: italic;">Personality & social psychology bulletin, 33</span> (5), 603-14 PMID: <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17440210" rev="review">17440210</a></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Haney, C., Banks, C., & Zimbardo, P. G. (1973). Interpersonal dynamics
in a simulated prison. <i>International
Journal of Criminology and Penology, 1</i>, 69-97. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Haney, C., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2009). Persistent Dispositionalism in
Interactionist Clothing: Fundamental Attribution Error in Explaining Prison
Abuse. <i>Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 35</i>(6), 807-814. doi: 10.1177/0146167208322864<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Krueger, J. I. (2008). Lucifer's last laugh. <i>The American Journal of Psychology, 121</i>, 335-341. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
McFarland, S., & Carnahan, T. (2009). A Situation's First Powers Are
Attracting Volunteers and Selecting Participants: A Reply to Haney and Zimbardo
(2009). <i>Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 35</i>(6), 815-818. doi: 10.1177/0146167209334781<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
Zimbardo, P. G. (2007). <i>The
Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil</i> (1st ed.). New
York: Random House.</div>
<div>
<div id="ftn3">
</div>
</div>
Scott McGrealhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13757633582829269183noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2304269645366413372.post-84682171143128626512013-10-25T14:24:00.001+11:002014-11-07T13:50:06.467+11:00The Complex Relationship Between Intelligence and Political Orientation<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="float: left; padding: 5px;"><a href="http://www.researchblogging.org/"><img alt="ResearchBlogging.org" src="http://www.researchblogging.org/public/citation_icons/rb2_large_gray.png" style="border: 0;" /></a></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/personality-intelligence-and-race-realism" target="_blank">Intelligence</a> is easily one of the most controversial and
divisive issues in scientific psychology. Add the issue of political ideology
and the result is likely to stir up heated debate. Dr Goal Saedi at Psychology Today touched on the subject of how <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/millennial-media/201304/do-racism-conservatism-and-low-iq-go-hand-in-hand">intelligence
is related to political ideology</a> and provoked
quite a strong response. The subject is a complex one and not yet fully
understood. A review of the research literature reveals some conflicting findings, but
one theme that seems to emerge is that the cultural context appears to influence the way
that intelligence and political orientation are related to each other.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjpyPUJz_Xx7hB3FKJ15q-5POxYizTsv45g6UTM0YJKKLAhe_ooiQs5SNZbcU8W7KeGuSHqDPuh7fWyMV5L5rDV0NxCbVbMOIJeEnWJRAr6NUOSAko2bFOxhI4ix_BG7uaAalmds5S_5vI/s1600/republican+brain.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjpyPUJz_Xx7hB3FKJ15q-5POxYizTsv45g6UTM0YJKKLAhe_ooiQs5SNZbcU8W7KeGuSHqDPuh7fWyMV5L5rDV0NxCbVbMOIJeEnWJRAr6NUOSAko2bFOxhI4ix_BG7uaAalmds5S_5vI/s1600/republican+brain.jpg" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 11px; text-align: start;">Psychologists have often been unkind to conservatives</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 10px; line-height: 11px; text-align: start;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
A variety of theories have been proposed about the nature of
the relationship between political views and intelligence. Some scholars (for
example Stankov, 2009) have argued that
conservative political ideologies tend to be associated with lower intelligence
on average. Conservatives generally value tradition, respect for authority, and
social order, and tend to be low in <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/opening-the-mind-where-skepticism-and-superstition-meet" target="_blank">openness to experience</a>, and so are leery of innovation and change. These scholars
have argued that such values tend to be associated with cognitive rigidity and
may therefore appeal to people who have difficulty with intellectual challenges
that require them to process novel information. In support of this, Stankov
(2009) cited evidence that people with more conservative views tend to score lower
on IQ tests and to have lower levels of education. Not surprisingly,
conservatives tend to react angrily to such assertions. Accusations of
liberal bias among academics are often made and there does appear to be a
degree of truth to these, especially among social psychologists in particular (e.g. Prentice, 2012). <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
An alternative theory, originally proposed by Hans Eysenck,
is that higher intelligence is associated with avoidance of extreme political
views in general. Hence, more intelligent people are thought to be
moderate/centrist in their political views. The argument is that more extreme
views, whether right-wing or left-wing, tend to be associated with <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201309/dogmatism-and-openness-experience-in-the-non-religious" target="_blank">dogmatism</a>
and rigidity, which are more appealing to less intelligent people. A recent
proponent of this view is <a href="https://lesacreduprintemps19.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/political-orientations-intelligence-and-education.pdf">Rinderman</a>
who argued that more intelligent people tend to have civic values that lead
them to support political systems they believe will foster education and the
growth of knowledge (Rindermann, Flores-Mendoza,
& Woodley, 2012). Hence, according to this view, intelligent people
tend to believe that moderate/centrist parties are more likely to promote their
particular social interests compared to more clearly left or right parties. In
support of this, Rinderman et al. cite findings from Great Britain and Brazil
showing that people who expressed support for centrist parties (including
centre-right and centre-left) had higher average IQ’s compared to those who
supported more clearly left or right parties. An interesting finding from the
study in Brazil was that people who had a political orientation at all tended
to have a higher IQ than those who said they had no political orientation. This
suggests that people who are more intelligent tend to be more interested in and
informed about politics generally. It is worth noting that the average IQ’s
cited for the various political orientations in Rinderman et al.’s study were all
well within the normal range (an IQ
ranging between 90 – 110 is considered “average”). For example, those who
supported centre-right parties had the highest IQ (about 105) whereas those who
supported clearly left or right parties had IQ’s around 94. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Although Rinderman et al. found that more intelligent people
tended to support more moderate views, an American study found the opposite
effect. Kemmelmeier (2008) surveyed
college students who scored above average in academic achievement tests (e.g.
SAT and ACT) and found two trends. There was a linear trend for more
intelligent students to be less conservative overall, in line with Stankov’s
findings. Additionally, there was a non-linear<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="line-height: 107%;"> </span></span><span style="line-height: 107%;">trend</span><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><sup>[1] </sup></span>for the most intelligent students to support more extreme (i.e. left or
right-wing) political views as opposed to more moderate ones, contrary to the
findings of Rinderman et al. Political views in this study was measured by
first asking people how liberal vs. conservative they were, and additionally
asking about their views on more specific issues referred to as “traditional
gender roles” and “anti-regulation” attitudes. Participants’ views on the
former issues (e.g. gay marriage and abortion) were more strongly associated
with their overall conservatism than their views on government regulation (e.g.
gun control, higher taxes for the wealthy, speech codes on campus).
Interestingly, higher intelligence was associated with less conservative views
on traditional gender roles on the one hand, but more “conservative” views
opposing government regulation. This suggests that more intelligent people in
this study tended to support both greater personal freedom and less government
regulation in general (libertarians take note). This finding is similar to that
of a previous finding that higher education was associated with greater support
for liberal social policies but not with support for greater economic
regulation (Gerber, Huber, Doherty, Dowling,
& Ha, 2010).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The respective findings of Rinderman et al. and of
Kemmelmeier would seem to contradict each other. The conflicting findings might
possibly reflect differences between the samples. Participants in Rinderman’s
study were predominantly of average intelligence, whereas those in
Kemmelmeier’s study were students from elite colleges with high levels of
intellectual ability. Perhaps, there is a complicated relationship with
intelligence such that people of average ability tend to prefer moderate views,
whereas those with greater intellectual gifts might perceive more extreme
ideologies, whether left or right-wing, as more sophisticated and hence more
appealing. Further research is needed to assess whether this is the case. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Another possibility is that the cultural context has an
important impact on what political ideologies are most acceptable to
intelligent people. The results of Rinderman et al.’s study might have been
influenced by the fact that Brazilian people have had a long history of living
through more extreme political regimes than in the USA. Hence, intelligent, sophisticated
voters in Brazil might be more wary of extreme political parties than in the
United States. Additionally, the ideologies that intelligent people support
might be influenced by social norms. Woodley’s cultural mediation hypothesis
proposes that that the highly intelligent are better at detecting and espousing
the values that are normative at a particular time (Woodley, 2010). Hence, intellectuals might fluctuate in their
support for left or right-wing views according to changing social norms. In support
of this, Woodley notes a study of white South Africans in the 1980’s that found
that higher cognitive ability was correlated with support for traditional
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201305/belief-in-god-supports-prejudice-against-gays-and-atheists" target="_blank">conservative religious</a> and political views, which were socially normative in
that time and place. Woodley argues that since the 1960s, post-materialist
values have become normative among intellectuals in much of the Western world.
Hence apparent associations between left-liberal views and intelligence may
reflect currently prevailing Western values. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The findings discussed illustrate a number of key points. Firstly,
highly intelligent individuals may actually support right-wing views, not just
left-wing ones, contrary to claims that support for right-wing positions
reflects a lack of intellectual sophistication. It seems fair to say then that not
only liberals, but conservatives (and those with other positions, such as
libertarians) can have intellectually sophisticated reasons for their political
views. The second point is that categorising people simply as generally liberal
or conservative may mask differences in people’s views on social versus
economic issues. The results of Kemmelmeier’s study suggest that when people
are asked if they are liberal or conservative, they may give more weight to
their views on social issues (such as abortion and gay rights) than to their
views on economic issues (such as taxation). Therefore, in order to better
understand how political attitudes are related to intelligence, a
two-dimensional model that separates social and economic attitudes (see <a href="http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz">The World’s Smallest Political Quiz</a>
for one example) may be preferable to the traditional yet overly simplistic
left/right distinction. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Finally, the relationship between intelligence and political
attitudes is most likely not fixed in some simple way, but probably changes
across time and context. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" />
<div id="ftn1">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><b><i>Footnote</i></b></span></span></span><br />
<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 10pt;">[1]</span></span></span> This could be visualised as like a U-shaped distribution of intelligence across the political spectrum. That is, there was a peak of intelligence on the left side, a dip in the middle, and a rise towards the right side. The left side tended to have more highly intelligent people than the right though, in line with the linear trend. </div>
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Please consider following me on </span></i></b><a href="https://www.facebook.com/UniqueLikeEverybodyElse"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Facebook,</span></i></b></a>
<a href="https://plus.google.com/b/116570783533948602312/116570783533948602312/posts"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Google
Plus</span></i></b></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">, or </span></i></b><a href="https://twitter.com/ScottAMcGreal"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Twitter</span></i></b></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">© Scott McGreal. Please do not reproduce without
permission. Brief excerpts may be quoted as long as a link to the original
article is provided. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">This article also appears on Psychology Today on
my blog <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201305/intelligence-and-politics-have-complex-relationship" target="_blank">Unique - Like Everybody Else</a>.</span><span style="color: red;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px;">
<em>Image credit: </em><a class="ext" href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/30268017@N03/6915213993/" style="color: #333333;" target="_blank">EN2008 </a><span class="ext" style="background-image: url(http://rsrc2.psychologytoday.com/sites/all/modules/contrib/extlink/extlink.png); background-position: 100% 50%; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; padding-right: 12px;"></span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px;">
<strong>Other articles discussing intelligence or the psychology of political orientation</strong></div>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;">
<span style="line-height: 150%;"><a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/personality-intelligence-and-race-realism" target="_blank"><span style="color: #333333;">Personality, Intelligence and
"Race Realism"</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; line-height: 150%; margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;">
<span style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="color: #333333;"><a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201211/cold-winters-and-the-evolution-intelligence" target="_blank">Cold Winters and the Evolution of
Intelligence</a> - </span><o:p></o:p></span><span style="line-height: 17px;">A critique of Richard Lynn’s Theory</span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; line-height: 150%; margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;">
<span style="line-height: 150%;"><a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/the-politics-dreaming" target="_blank"><span style="color: #333333;">The Politics of Dreaming</span></a></span><span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 10.5pt; line-height: 150%;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px;">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/emotional-intelligence-not-relevant-psychopaths">Emotional
intelligence is not relevant to understanding psychopaths</a><strong><span style="font-weight: normal;"><o:p></o:p></span></strong></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/why-there-are-sex-differences-in-general-knowledge">Why
there are sex differences in general knowledge</a><strong><span style="font-weight: normal;"><o:p></o:p></span></strong></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201308/the-knowledgeable-personality">The
Knowledgeable Personality</a><strong><span style="font-weight: normal;"><o:p></o:p></span></strong></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201212/think-man-effects-gender-priming-cognition">Think
Like a Man? Effects of Gender Priming on Cognition</a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201311/the-illusory-theory-multiple-intelligences" style="line-height: 107%;">The
Illusory Theory of Multiple Intelligences</a><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 107%;"> – a critique of Howard Gardner’s
theory</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201401/more-knowledge-less-belief-in-religion"><span style="background: white; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">More Knowledge, Less Belief in Religion?</span></a><span style="background: white; line-height: 107%;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 107%;">
<span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;"><a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201411/what-is-intelligent-personality">What
is an Intelligent Personality?</a> </span></span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b>References </b><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=2304269645366413372" name="_ENREF_1">Gerber, A. S., Huber, G. A., Doherty, D., Dowling, C.
M., & Ha, S. E. (2010). </a><a href="http://journals.cambridge.org/download.php?file=%2FPSR%2FPSR104_01%2FS0003055410000031a.pdf&code=763fc00d0b5c9c195367dab8427fc72d">Personality and
Political Attitudes: Relationships across Issue Domains and Political Contexts.</a> <i>American Political Science Review, 104</i>(01),
111-133. doi: doi:10.1017/S0003055410000031 <o:p></o:p></div>
<div style="text-indent: -48px;">
<span class="Z3988" title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.jtitle=Personality+and+Individual+Differences&rft_id=info%3Adoi%2F10.1016%2Fj.paid.2008.08.003&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fresearchblogging.org&rft.atitle=+Is+there+a+relationship+between+political+orientation+and+cognitive+ability%3F+A+test+of+three+hypotheses+in+two+studies.&rft.issn=&rft.date=2008&rft.volume=45&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=767&rft.epage=772&rft.artnum=&rft.au=Kemmelmeier%2C+M.&rfe_dat=bpr3.included=1;bpr3.tags=Psychology%2CPersonality%2C+Intelligence">Kemmelmeier, M. (2008). Is there a relationship between political orientation and cognitive ability? A test of three hypotheses in two studies. <span style="font-style: italic;">Personality and Individual Differences, 45</span> (8), 767-772 DOI: <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2008.08.003" rev="review">10.1016/j.paid.2008.08.003</a></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=2304269645366413372" name="_ENREF_3">Prentice, D. A. (2012). </a><a href="http://pps.sagepub.com/content/7/5/516.abstract">Liberal Norms and Their Discontents.</a> <i><span lang="FR">Perspectives on
Psychological Science, 7</span></i><span lang="FR">(5), 516-518. doi:
10.1177/1745691612454142</span><span lang="FR"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=2304269645366413372" name="_ENREF_4">Rindermann, H., Flores-Mendoza, C., & Woodley, M.
A. (2012). </a><a href="https://lesacreduprintemps19.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/political-orientations-intelligence-and-education.pdf">Political
orientations, intelligence and education</a>. <i>Intelligence, 40</i>(2), 217-225. doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2011.11.005<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=2304269645366413372" name="_ENREF_5">Stankov, L. (2009). Conservatism and cognitive
ability. </a><i><span lang="FR">Intelligence,
37</span></i><span lang="FR">(3), 294-304. doi: </span><a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2008.12.007"><span lang="FR">http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2008.12.007</span></a><span lang="FR"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 36.0pt; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=2304269645366413372" name="_ENREF_6">Woodley, M. A. (2010). Are
high-IQ individuals deficient in common sense? A critical examination of the
‘clever sillies’ hypothesis. <i>Intelligence,
38</i>(5), 471-480. doi: </a><a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2010.06.002">http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2010.06.002</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div>
<br />
<div id="ftn1">
</div>
</div>
Scott McGrealhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13757633582829269183noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2304269645366413372.post-29093040095476699772013-10-01T13:23:00.001+10:002013-12-10T18:55:25.144+11:00Individual Differences in Religious Prejudices<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="float: left; padding: 5px;"><a href="http://www.researchblogging.org/"><img alt="ResearchBlogging.org" src="http://www.researchblogging.org/public/citation_icons/rb2_large_gray.png" style="border: 0;" /></a></span><br />
Even though religions preach love of humanity, decades of
psychological <a href="http://www.augsburg.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/hall-et-al.-2010.pdf">research</a>
have linked religiousness with prejudice. In recent times, certain types of
prejudice, particularly racism, have become socially unacceptable and are
nowadays condemned by religious leaders. However, religious prejudice against
homosexuals and against atheists is still tolerated and even encouraged by
mainstream religious groups. Atheists in particular appear to be one of the <a href="http://atheism.about.com/od/atheistbigotryprejudice/a/AtheitsHated.htm">most
vilified minority groups</a> in <a href="http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=in-atheists-we-distrust">America</a>
today. Some researchers have argued that how dogmatically people hold their
beliefs is more important to religious prejudice than the actual content of
their beliefs. However, a recent study suggests that when it comes to prejudice
against gays and atheists, the content of the belief – specifically belief in
God – is as important, perhaps even more important, than how dogmatically a
person holds those beliefs.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjbNBV_8rhOJtyC-qwEJ57vE9vMHx3iAfbjWdjNpzGSjmvi3gTcxI-GHB8sySM29H1I1hyYGbd7nULn3ISXEzPQQbRpw8uzoN11OO09no8ZbjtjJ7CrmceAlUNm350u_Bun3LH4N76_YRE/s1600/Religion-B11.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="268" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjbNBV_8rhOJtyC-qwEJ57vE9vMHx3iAfbjWdjNpzGSjmvi3gTcxI-GHB8sySM29H1I1hyYGbd7nULn3ISXEzPQQbRpw8uzoN11OO09no8ZbjtjJ7CrmceAlUNm350u_Bun3LH4N76_YRE/s320/Religion-B11.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<i>Biblically based morality leaves something to be desired from a humanitarian standpoint</i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b>Different kinds of religiosity and prejudice<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The relationship between religiosity and various kinds of
prejudice has been noted for a long time. For example, studies from the 1950s
found that church-goers were more likely to hold racist views than people who
never attend church. Religiosity is a complex concept and so researchers have
attempted to understand which particular features of religiousness are
particularly relevant to prejudice. Gordon Allport, for example, proposed that
people can have either <i>intrinsic </i>or <i>extrinsic </i>motives for religious
behaviour. Extrinsic motives are ones where religion is seen as a means to
another end (e.g. attending church for social reasons) whereas people with
intrinsic motives see religion as an end in itself, and therefore the central
guiding principle in their lives. Allport was of the view that extrinsic
religiosity was associated with the negative features of religion, such as
prejudice, whilst intrinsic religiosity was a more “mature” approach,
associated with the best qualities of religion. Allport even claimed that
intrinsically religious people have “no place for rejection, contempt, or condescension” toward others (Hall, Matz, & Wood, 2010). However, while
research has shown that extrinsic religiosity is positively associated with
racism, intrinsic religiosity is largely uncorrelated with racism, suggesting
that intrinsically religious people are little different from people who are
not religious with regard to racial prejudice. Additionally, there is evidence
that people’s ratings of intrinsic religiosity are affected by socially
desirable responding, so that intrinsically religious people may be more
concerned with the appearance of being virtuous, rather than the reality. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b>Fundamentalism strongly predicts prejudice<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
An alternative approach has been to consider how
dogmatically a person holds their religious beliefs. Dogmatism may be
considered a sign of cognitive inflexibility, and people who are inflexible in
their thinking may be more likely to hold stereotyped views of minority groups that
promote prejudice. In support of this, a number of studies have linked
religious fundamentalism in people of many different religions – including
Hindus, Muslims, and Jews, as well as Christians – with increased anti-gay
prejudice (Hunsberger, 1995). Holding
absolutist beliefs that forbid one to question dogma and that regard the world
as divided into good and evil tends to be conducive to prejudice. In contrast,
religious people who value willingness to question one’s beliefs, who
acknowledge that other beliefs might also contain truth, and who are
non-authoritarian, tend to be less prejudiced, although not less so than
non-religious people (Hunsberger, 1995). <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh8WcTzYNvUiy6gL4cViYj-Psr2-PnloXbPx8PP0yuhD7TGnGLipjfh-uvWjssndqsi1ZZqjZKgb3q01YNTxcg7ptT1ZTpdpxC6u8fZ76IF6jNohFERwMhEb31Mt0-15KfksYBPjiGkAQY/s1600/The-Atheist-e.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh8WcTzYNvUiy6gL4cViYj-Psr2-PnloXbPx8PP0yuhD7TGnGLipjfh-uvWjssndqsi1ZZqjZKgb3q01YNTxcg7ptT1ZTpdpxC6u8fZ76IF6jNohFERwMhEb31Mt0-15KfksYBPjiGkAQY/s320/The-Atheist-e.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b>The <i>How </i>and the <i>What </i>of Religious Belief <o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Findings linking dogmatism to prejudice across a number of
religions have led some researchers to conclude that the <i>how</i> of belief – the cognitive rigidity or flexibility of one’s
beliefs – is more important to understanding prejudice than the <i>what </i>of belief – the actual content of
one’s belief. However, the authors of a recent paper have argued that most
studies on the subject have confounded the ‘how’ and the ‘what’ rather than
measuring them separately. Specifically, the authors argue that how strongly
one believes in God or a higher power (the <i>what</i>
component of belief) can contribute to prejudice independently of the rigidity
of one’s beliefs (the <i>how</i> component) (Shen, Yelderman, Haggard, & Rowatt, 2013).
Belief in God may be relevant to specific prejudice against people who are seen
to violate one’s values. Specifically, gay people and atheists are perceived by
many religious people as being in violation of religious values.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The authors used a measure called the <a href="http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:1obSSFKup-UJ:www.kuleuven.be/thomas/page/pkg-pcbs/download/73908/+&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk">Post
Critical Beliefs Scale</a> (PCBS) to disentangle the respective effects of
cognitive rigidity and belief in God on prejudice. The PCBS assesses religious
belief based on two broad dimensions: whether one takes a literal or symbolic
approach, which is thought to assess rigidity/flexibility of belief; and
inclusion/exclusion of transcendence, which assesses belief in the existence of
God or a higher power. Prejudice was measured with a measure of comfort with
social proximity to the target groups. That is, people who express greater
discomfort being around members of particular groups are considered to be more
prejudiced against them. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b>Belief in God and Prejudice against “Value-Violators” <o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The results of two studies showed that belief in God
significantly predicted prejudice against both gays and atheists respectively
even when taking into account the level of cognitive rigidity (literal-symbolic
belief). Belief in God was actually more strongly related to prejudice against
atheists than against gay people.<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-AU; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">[1]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span>
In contrast, cognitive rigidity was associated with greater prejudice against
black people, but belief in God was not. Furthermore, the second study by Shen
et al. found that intrinsic religiosity, religious behaviour (service
attendance, reading sacred texts, and prayer), and general religiosity
(self-rating of how religious one is) were also associated quite substantially
with prejudice against gays and atheists, but not with prejudice against
blacks. This is contrary to Allport’s claim that intrinsically religious people
have no place for rejection or contempt of their fellow man. The results of
this study indicate that people who believe strongly in God and regard their
religion as very important are very uncomfortable around gays and atheists, but
especially the latter. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhJk9IkJz2mz_hvA3CVecX3v3ngXvWr85HL0zjj-YYX7zWWEZl5NeCtA9lFHbT66MylvbBgr2k3Ztb0sEBbe3Moi2Cdo_HYLaKC0M852HC1_PHv5KoXk4DY8xvfWg7TIra5Q1xEIgiQx48/s1600/Why_Do_Atheists_Hate_America_billboard.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhJk9IkJz2mz_hvA3CVecX3v3ngXvWr85HL0zjj-YYX7zWWEZl5NeCtA9lFHbT66MylvbBgr2k3Ztb0sEBbe3Moi2Cdo_HYLaKC0M852HC1_PHv5KoXk4DY8xvfWg7TIra5Q1xEIgiQx48/s1600/Why_Do_Atheists_Hate_America_billboard.jpg" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<i>Religion can also promote in-group loyalty at the expense of those who don't share the same beliefs</i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The authors of this
study concluded that the two components of religiousness they studied –
cognitive rigidity and belief in God – each tend to contribute to specific prejudices.
Cognitive rigidity appears to be more strongly related to racial prejudice,
whereas belief in God appears to be related more particularly to
“value-violating” prejudice, specifically against gays and atheists. It is also
worth noting that modern religious leaders tend to condemn racial prejudice,
but are more often tolerant of, or even encourage, prejudice against gays and
atheists (Whitley, 2009). <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b>Some Limitations of the Study and Future Directions<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
While I think the findings of Shen et al. are quite
interesting, their methodology may have had certain limitations. The sole
measure of prejudice used was based on social distance. While this is useful,
it would also have been informative to examine how more specific prejudicial
and stereotyped beliefs about gays and atheists (e.g. “atheists have no moral
values,” “gays corrupt children”) might be related to belief in God and
cognitive rigidity respectively. I also have some reservations about the
“literal-symbolic” dimension of the PCBS as a measure of cognitive-rigidity. In
particular, people who reject religious faith altogether and people with very
literal orthodox religious beliefs are both classified as being cognitively
rigid because they do not accept a “symbolic” interpretation of religion belief.
This seems to treat atheism as an alternative form of dogmatism, which is
questionable. Just because one rejects religious faith does not necessarily
imply that one is dogmatic in the sense of being unable to consider the
possibility that one might be mistaken. (Although for an examination of dogmatism in atheists see this article <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201309/dogmatism-and-openness-experience-in-the-non-religious" target="_blank">here</a>.) Use of a content-free measure of
dogmatism would provide a clearer understanding of the role of cognitive
rigidity.<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Finally, this study looked at whether belief in God in
general is related to prejudice. This is certainly important to know. However,
future studies might examine whether more specific beliefs about what God is
like provide more accurate predictions of prejudice than just belief in God
generally. For example, belief in a morally judgmental god who rejects people
deemed to be “immoral” might be a stronger predictor of prejudice compared to
belief in a warm fuzzy deity who accepts everyone. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I would also like to acknowledge that, in line with most
statistical trends in psychology, there are exceptions to the general findings
presented here. There are religious people who are accepting of gay people and
of people who do not share their belief in a higher power, even if they do
appear to be in the minority. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br clear="all" /></div>
<hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" />
<div id="ftn1">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 10pt;">[1]</span></span></span> For the statistically-minded, the difference between correlations was significant in both studies. </div>
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Please consider following me on </span></i></b><a href="https://www.facebook.com/UniqueLikeEverybodyElse"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Facebook,</span></i></b></a>
<a href="https://plus.google.com/b/116570783533948602312/116570783533948602312/posts"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Google
Plus</span></i></b></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">, or </span></i></b><a href="https://twitter.com/ScottAMcGreal"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Twitter</span></i></b></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">© Scott McGreal. Please do not reproduce without
permission. Brief excerpts may be quoted as long as a link to the original
article is provided. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">This article also appears on Psychology Today on
my blog <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201305/belief-in-god-supports-prejudice-against-gays-and-atheists" target="_blank">Unique - Like Everybody Else</a>.</span><span style="color: red;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="font-size: 13px;">
<strong><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Related Reading</span></strong></div>
<div style="font-size: 13px;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a data-mce-href="http://epiphenom.fieldofscience.com/2009/09/why-are-atheists-so-disliked.html" href="http://epiphenom.fieldofscience.com/2009/09/why-are-atheists-so-disliked.html" target="_blank">Why are Atheists so Disliked?</a> Epiphenomenon blog</span></div>
<div style="font-size: 13px;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<strong><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Other posts about the psychology of religion and/or spirituality</span></strong></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><strong></strong></span></div>
<div style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="line-height: 150%;"><a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201309/dogmatism-and-openness-experience-in-the-non-religious" target="_blank">Dogmatism and Openness to Experience in the Non-Religious</a></span><span style="line-height: 150%;"><o:p></o:p></span></span><br />
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201310/what-oprah-doesnt-understand-about-awe-and-atheists" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">What Oprah doesn't understand about awe and atheists</span></a></div>
<div style="line-height: 150%; margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 150%;"><a data-mce-href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201301/troubled-souls-spirituality-mental-health-hazard" href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201301/troubled-souls-spirituality-mental-health-hazard">Troubled
Souls: Spirituality as a Mental Health Hazard</a><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="line-height: 150%; margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 150%;"><a data-mce-href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201212/the-spirituality-psychedelic-drug-users" href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201212/the-spirituality-psychedelic-drug-users">The
Spirituality of Psychedelic Drug Users</a><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="line-height: 150%; margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 150%;"><a data-mce-href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/reason-versus-faith-the-interplay-intuition-and-rationality-in-sup" href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/reason-versus-faith-the-interplay-intuition-and-rationality-in-sup">Reason
Versus Faith? The Interplay of Intuition and Rationality In Supernatural Belief</a><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="line-height: 150%; margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 150%;"><a data-mce-href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/opening-the-mind-where-skepticism-and-superstition-meet" href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/opening-the-mind-where-skepticism-and-superstition-meet">Opening
the Mind: Where Skepticism and Superstition Meet</a></span></div>
<div style="line-height: 150%; margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 150%;"><a data-mce-href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/is-insulting-religion-extremism" href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/is-insulting-religion-extremism">Is
Insulting Religion "Extremism"?</a><span style="font-size: x-small;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>References <o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
Hall, D. L., Matz, D. C., & Wood, W. (2010). Why
Don’t We Practice What We Preach? A Meta-Analytic Review of Religious Racism. <i>Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14</i>(1),
126-139. doi: 10.1177/1088868309352179<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
Hunsberger, B. (1995). Religion and Prejudice: The
Role of Religious Fundamentalism, Quest, and Right-Wing Authoritarianism. <i>Journal of Social Issues, 51</i>(2),
113-129. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.1995.tb01326.x<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
<span class="Z3988" title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.jtitle=Personality+and+Individual+Differences&rft_id=info%3Adoi%2F10.1016%2Fj.paid.2012.10.008&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fresearchblogging.org&rft.atitle=Disentangling+the+belief+in+God+and+cognitive+rigidity%2Fflexibility+components+of+religiosity+to+predict+racial+and+value-violating+prejudice%3A+A+Post-Critical+Belief+Scale+analysis.&rft.issn=&rft.date=2013&rft.volume=54&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=389&rft.epage=395&rft.artnum=&rft.au=Shen%2C+M.+J.%2C+Yelderman%2C+L.+A.%2C+Haggard%2C+M.+C.%2C+%26amp%3B+Rowatt%2C+W.+C.&rfe_dat=bpr3.included=1;bpr3.tags=Psychology%2CPersonality%2C+Social+Psychology%2C+Psychology+of+Religion">Shen, M. J., Yelderman, L. A., Haggard, M. C., & Rowatt, W. C. (2013). Disentangling the belief in God and cognitive rigidity/flexibility components of religiosity to predict racial and value-violating prejudice: A Post-Critical Belief Scale analysis. <span style="font-style: italic;">Personality and Individual Differences, 54</span> (3), 389-395 DOI: <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.10.008" rev="review">10.1016/j.paid.2012.10.008</a></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 36.0pt; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
Whitley, B. E. (2009).
Religiosity and Attitudes Toward Lesbians and Gay Men: A Meta-Analysis. <i>International Journal for the Psychology of
Religion, 19</i>(1), 21-38. doi: 10.1080/10508610802471104</div>
<div>
<div id="ftn1">
</div>
</div>
Scott McGrealhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13757633582829269183noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2304269645366413372.post-31243705389012402842013-07-23T21:34:00.002+10:002013-11-18T10:04:02.229+11:00The Myth of Catharsis: Why Ranting and Venting are Terrible Ways to Handle Anger <div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="float: left; padding: 5px;"><a href="http://www.researchblogging.org/"><img alt="ResearchBlogging.org" src="http://www.researchblogging.org/public/citation_icons/rb2_large_gray.png" style="border: 0;" /></a></span><br />
The belief that “venting” anger has a beneficial cathartic
effect has become widely accepted in the modern world. Belief in the value of venting has
manifested in the online world in the form of “rant” sites (e.g. <a href="http://rantrampage.com/">Rant Rampage</a>) where people not only get to
freely express their vitriol, they can also read and comment on rants left by
other venters. However, decades of research have shown that venting, far from
releasing anger, actually makes it worse. Not surprisingly, a recent study has
shown that online ranting seems to increase anger and is associated with
anger-related problems. Ranting may be problematic because it strengthens the belief that anger
needs to be expressed aggressively. On the other hand, expressing anger in a
constructive and non-aggressive way can actually be beneficial. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhkdYYP1WnW5eULyT_y-Imramz6YGvxFEj1FCfVBy7-89LIvxPRhBG6u-mRD9GzSufHNBmQvHjpjrgtZQKz1JjKQ5XJnr_QpHxebGi68EMsafhU_uBXCiAcOCbvmnt5pwMRJlln1Gtr9sg/s1600/rage_by_pypher-d5um1g7.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhkdYYP1WnW5eULyT_y-Imramz6YGvxFEj1FCfVBy7-89LIvxPRhBG6u-mRD9GzSufHNBmQvHjpjrgtZQKz1JjKQ5XJnr_QpHxebGi68EMsafhU_uBXCiAcOCbvmnt5pwMRJlln1Gtr9sg/s320/rage_by_pypher-d5um1g7.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 10px; line-height: 11px; text-align: start;">Image credit: "Rage" by pypher courtesy of DeviantArt</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b>Who uses rant sites and how they handle anger</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
A recent paper (<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23249241">Martin, Coyier, VanSistine, & Schroeder, 2013</a>) sheds some light on the people who use rant sites
and the effects of ranting and writing rants. A survey of users of a number of
popular rant sites found that users scored unusually high on trait anger (how
anger-prone one is in general) and experienced many negative consequences
related to anger, such as verbal and physical fights, damaged relationships,
property damage, and dangerous driving. Nearly half reported that someone had
told them they had an anger problem, and over a third admitted that this was
true. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It may well be that people who are predisposed to be very
angry are attracted to these kinds of sites. Martin et al. performed an
experiment to test the emotional impact of using rant sites. They found that
reading another person’s rants online for five minutes had a negative effect on
mood. Additionally, they asked participants to spend five minutes writing a
rant of their own. As expected, after ranting, participants felt decreased
happiness and increased anger. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjZ7k4hpfGNf0pp_9De-dXuXT5wK9JhW7kKcISeqRjKp-si2uKGawkjWzvIas4KBcYgdujKGnto3nDo-XnL7Gj4dpz3ALpJD9jmFgJeLyFx12_9CaZtGljRacVZLpY2HjGb_hkOZtrNWoQ/s1600/a_good_middle_finger_by_semc-d4nuiaj.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjZ7k4hpfGNf0pp_9De-dXuXT5wK9JhW7kKcISeqRjKp-si2uKGawkjWzvIas4KBcYgdujKGnto3nDo-XnL7Gj4dpz3ALpJD9jmFgJeLyFx12_9CaZtGljRacVZLpY2HjGb_hkOZtrNWoQ/s320/a_good_middle_finger_by_semc-d4nuiaj.jpg" width="229" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 10px; line-height: 11px; text-align: start;">People who like to rant get into more fights than most people. Image credit: SEMC courtesy of DeviantArt</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b>The ineffectiveness of catharsis</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
These findings about ranting accord with previous research showing that supposedly “venting” anger through such actions as hitting
pillows or whatever actually increase anger levels, and, more troubling,
increase subsequent aggressive behavior as well (<a href="http://psp.sagepub.com/content/28/6/724.abstract">Bushman, 2002</a>). For
example, one study (Bushman, 2002) found that doing nothing at all for two
minutes was actually effective in reducing anger, whereas punching a sand bag
for as long as one wanted while thinking of an offending person increased anger
towards that person. Furthermore, when given an opportunity to punish another
person in a game by blasting them with noise<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-AU; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">[1]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span>,
people who had previously “vented” their fury on a punching bag were more
aggressive (gave louder and longer blasts) than those who had done nothing to
vent their anger. (A more detailed description of this study can be found <a href="http://youarenotsosmart.com/2010/08/11/catharsis/">here</a>.) What this
shows is that venting is actually a terrible anger management strategy. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In spite of the fact that venting is likely to backfire in
the long run, belief in its value is widespread and even encouraged. Popular
self-help books promote venting, and there was even once a billboard in
Missouri that said: “Hit a Pillow, Hit a Wall, But Don’t Hit Your Kids!”
Hitting a pillow is obviously preferable to hitting one’s kids, but ironically
such advice may actually increase the likelihood of real violence rather than
preventing it. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So why do people believe in it and why does it not work?
Venting reflects a “pressure cooker” model of anger. That is, people think of
anger as something that builds up in side of one until one is ready to explode.
Venting is supposed to be like blowing off steam to reduce the pressure inside
until it is more manageable. This metaphor seems intuitively appealing to many
people and even was endorsed by Sigmund Freud who promoted the idea that
cathartic expressions of emotion were beneficial to mental health because they
released pent up “psychic energy” that if not discharged would manifest in
neurotic symptoms. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
However, the fact that venting actually increases rather
than reduces anger indicates that Freud’s cathartic model is misguided. A more
modern theory of anger, the cognitive neoassociation model, proposes that
people associate violent, aggressive actions with angry thoughts (Bushman, 2002). Thus, aggressively styled
behaviour, such as hitting things, or ranting (basically saying nasty things
about someone and wishing them ill) maintain a person’s attention on angry
thoughts, rather than dissipating the anger. Venting and ranting effectively
keep angry feelings in memory and increase rumination about the offending
event. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj4aszDwHiuzkbs_T_hzKVo1DAsMD_EccbJt-hhKKREyc8MrJwuFHfGnboPublaVWgPsSNn82r1QYCWtiTpGEgy3RoUV_26uyMAfWNmIlPwF2gKWafR-8hHqtPzQsLRHpXo3x4VWS_t_Yg/s1600/mustafar_by_dominiquewesson-d5phhk9.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="215" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj4aszDwHiuzkbs_T_hzKVo1DAsMD_EccbJt-hhKKREyc8MrJwuFHfGnboPublaVWgPsSNn82r1QYCWtiTpGEgy3RoUV_26uyMAfWNmIlPwF2gKWafR-8hHqtPzQsLRHpXo3x4VWS_t_Yg/s320/mustafar_by_dominiquewesson-d5phhk9.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 10px; line-height: 11px; text-align: start;">Badly managed anger can have dark consequences indeed. Image credit: DominiqueWesson courtesy of DeviantArt</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b>Anger need not be destructive</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Venting may increase the likelihood of subsequent aggressive
behaviour perhaps because the idea of venting is based on the idea that anger
is essentially destructive. That is, people link anger with wanting to hurt
others, and therefore think that these hurtful impulses can best be dissipated
through symbolic acts of aggression. Venting and ranting may therefore
strengthen the association between anger and aggression. However, although it
is true that when people are angry they may want to hurt others, anger does not
have to be expressed through aggression. (Indeed, aggression can occur in the
absence of any anger.) Many people learn how to express their anger in
constructive ways. Doing so can sometimes help resolve the problem that
provoked the anger in the first place (which is unlikely to occur through
venting). Additionally, expressing anger constructively has been found to have
a number of benefits for mental and physical health, such as reduced blood
pressure (Graham, Lobel, Glass, & Lokshina,
2008). <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b>Beneficial effects of expressive writing about anger</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
A constructive alternative to ranting may be focused
expressive writing, which involves exploring one’s deepest thoughts and
feelings about an issue in writing (Graham, et
al., 2008). Superficially, writing a rant might seem similar to
expressive writing but there are subtle and important differences. Ranting
seems to mainly involve describing all the things you don’t like about someone,
e.g. how they are a worthless, good-for-nothing who has done you wrong, and
generally trying to compress as much malevolence as possible into one’s words.
Ranting as such seems like an unreflective process without a clear goal.
Expressive writing tasks on the other hand, encourage a person to try to
understand the causes of their feelings and thereby gain some insight that may
lead to a resolution of the problem. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
One study found that expressing anger constructively through
writing had a beneficial effect on mental health (Graham, et al., 2008). Participants in this study all suffered
from chronic <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201301/personality-and-pain-relief">pain</a>
and were asked to write a letter on two occasions expressing their anger about
their situation.<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-AU; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">[2]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span> To
ensure that participants did not simply write pointless rants, they were given
clear instructions that directed them to describe their anger feelings clearly,
specifying what they were angry about; explain their angry reaction instead of
just venting; and to state what they wished to be done to help them feel less
angry. These instructions were intended to help the writers get a clearer
understanding of their feelings about their situation and what they wanted to
do about it. Examination of the contents of the letters showed that most
participants were able to express their anger without nastiness or bitterness.
Compared to a control group, participants who had written these letters
reported less depression and greater feelings of control over their pain at
subsequent follow up assessments (four weeks and then nine weeks after
writing). <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
What this study suggests to me is that expressing anger in a
thoughtful constructive way without aggressive intentions can be helpful in
creating a sense of greater control over one’s emotional life. I suspect that
ranting on the other hand creates a sense of permission for one to lose control
of one’s emotions that may leak over into other aspects of one’s life
potentially causing all sorts of problems. That is, ranting may be an
indulgence that weakens one’s ability to cope effectively with one’s emotions.
In summary, doing nothing at all is a more effective way of dealing with anger,
rather than hitting a pillow, or posting rants on the internet. Perhaps better
yet though would be to learn to use one’s anger constructively rather than
mindlessly trying to blow it off as if one was a human pressure cooker.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" />
<div id="ftn1">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif; font-size: x-small;"><b>Notes</b></span></div>
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 10pt;">[1]</span></span></span> Participants in this study were actually playing against a computer, so their blasts were not heard by a real person, but they did not know this at the time.<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn2">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 10pt;">[2]</span></span></span> They were not expected to actually post these letters to anyone. </div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Follow me on </span></i></b><a href="https://www.facebook.com/UniqueLikeEverybodyElse"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Facebook,</span></i></b></a>
<a href="https://plus.google.com/b/116570783533948602312/116570783533948602312/posts"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Google
Plus</span></i></b></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">, or </span></i></b><a href="https://twitter.com/ScottAMcGreal"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Twitter</span></i></b></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">© Scott McGreal. Please do not reproduce without
permission. Brief excerpts may be quoted as long as a link to the original
article is provided. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">This article also appears on Psychology Today on
my blog <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201303/internet-ranting-and-the-myth-catharsis" target="_blank">Unique - Like Everybody Else</a>.</span><span style="color: red;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Another blog post about anger and how NOT to deal with it<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"><a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/is-insulting-religion-extremism">Is
Insulting Religion extremism?</a></span><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>References <o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
Bushman, B. J. (2002). Does Venting Anger Feed or
Extinguish the Flame? Catharsis, Rumination, Distraction, Anger, and Aggressive
Responding. <i>Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 28</i>(6), 724-731. doi: <a href="http://psp.sagepub.com/content/28/6/724.abstract">10.1177/0146167202289002</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
Graham, J., Lobel, M., Glass, P., & Lokshina, I.
(2008). Effects of written anger expression in chronic pain patients: making
meaning from pain. <i>Journal of Behavioral
Medicine, 31</i>(3), 201-212. doi: <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18320302">10.1007/s10865-008-9149-4</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 36.0pt; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
<span class="Z3988" title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.jtitle=Cyberpsychology%2C+Behavior%2C+and+Social+Networking&rft_id=info%3Adoi%2F10.1089%2Fcyber.2012.0130&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fresearchblogging.org&rft.atitle=Anger+on+the+Internet%3A+The+Perceived+Value+of+Rant-Sites&rft.issn=&rft.date=2013&rft.volume=16&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=&rft.epage=&rft.artnum=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fpubmed%2F23249241&rft.au=Martin%2C+R.+C.&rft.au=Coyier%2C+K.+R.&rft.au=VanSistine%2C+L.+M.&rft.au=Schroeder%2C+K.+L.&rfe_dat=bpr3.included=1;bpr3.tags=Psychology%2CPersonality%2C+Anger%2C+%2C+Affective+Psychology%2C+Social+Psychology">Martin, R. C., Coyier, K. R., VanSistine, L. M., & Schroeder, K. L. (2013). Anger on the Internet: The Perceived Value of Rant-Sites <span style="font-style: italic;">Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 16</span> (2) DOI: <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2012.0130" rev="review">10.1089/cyber.2012.0130</a></span></div>
<br />
<div>
<br />
<div id="ftn2">
</div>
</div>
Scott McGrealhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13757633582829269183noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2304269645366413372.post-7696473718616313972013-06-11T22:16:00.000+10:002013-06-14T13:37:18.350+10:00The Far-Fetched Infidelity Detection Hypothesis of Oral Sex<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="line-height: 18px;"><span style="float: left; padding: 5px;"><a href="http://www.researchblogging.org/"><img alt="ResearchBlogging.org" src="http://www.researchblogging.org/public/citation_icons/rb2_large_gray.png" style="border: 0;" /></a></span></span></span><br />
<div style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;">
Theories
about the evolution of human sexuality have spawned some intriguing
ideas. One of the more peculiar ones is that oral sex has an
evolutionary function, namely to detect recent infidelity by one's
partner. Cunnilingus for example, is supposed to allow a man to detect the
presence of another man's semen in or around the woman's vagina. A recently
published<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886912005764">study</a><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>aimed to test this theory and found
that a man's interest in performing cunnilingus was correlated
with his partner's attractiveness. The authors argued that more attractive
women are more likely to be targeted by other men for mate poaching, and that
partners of such women have more reason to be concerned about sperm
competition, and therefore use oral sex to detect possible infidelity, albeit unconsciously.
They concluded that their results confirm their hypothesis that oral sex
functions to detect infidelity. Although interesting, their results are
inconclusive because they did not appear to consider a more obvious explanation
for their findings.<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiNRwTipVnU6xXx0P56hZ35Xkz15u_Z75V3dygH3CaLqwQHCNgyBIC6oa_XS8-Q_qkyVGAgu8xvK0w3n-j_83lGPepEadzboNsCTro3-7DQYhhOK-XrKmUd-fqhOnTPtitbDCz3JMGrBOQ/s1600/The-Ultimate-Guide-to-Cunnilingus-9781573441445.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiNRwTipVnU6xXx0P56hZ35Xkz15u_Z75V3dygH3CaLqwQHCNgyBIC6oa_XS8-Q_qkyVGAgu8xvK0w3n-j_83lGPepEadzboNsCTro3-7DQYhhOK-XrKmUd-fqhOnTPtitbDCz3JMGrBOQ/s320/The-Ultimate-Guide-to-Cunnilingus-9781573441445.jpg" width="213" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><i>Is cunnilingus just about pleasure or does it have a darker purpose? </i></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;">According to many evolutionary psychologists, men
have been concerned with detecting and counteracting infidelity by their
partners through human history. Sperm competition occurs when the sperm from two or more males occupy a
woman’s reproductive tract at the same time, and hence compete to fertilise her
ovum. Scholars have claimed that men have evolved a variety of mechanisms to deal
with the threat of sperm competition (Pham &
Shackelford, 2013). For example, some research has found that men
ejaculate a greater volume of sperm when they have been separated from their
partner for a good period of time compared to when they have been in each
other’s company for the same amount of time. This is presumed to occur because
there is a greater risk that the woman may have been unfaithful in her
partner’s absence. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Pham and Schackelford (2013) argued that men with
more attractive partners are at a greater recurrent risk of sperm competition
because other men are more likely to woo them into having affairs. Therefore,
men with more attractive partners have more reason to be concerned about and
more likely to engage in behaviour aimed to detect infidelity. The idea that
cunnilingus, oral sex performed on a woman, could function to detect infidelity
was proposed in a 2006 book, but this study is the first to test this
empirically. The idea is that oral sex may allow a man to detect the presence
of another man’s semen through smell or taste. Pham and Schackelford’s study
did not test whether men can actually detect semen in this manner (admittedly a
difficult thing for a research study to test). What they did test were the
hypotheses that men with more attractive partners (presumed to present a
greater “recurrent risk of sperm competition”) would be more interested in
performing oral sex, and that they would perform it for a longer duration “to
better detect rival semen.” Contrary to what has been </span><a href="http://www.yourtango.com/2013170439/does-oral-sex-detect-infidelity"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;">claimed</span></a><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;">
elsewhere, the authors did not claim that men <i>consciously </i>perform oral sex because they think their partner has
been unfaithful. It is possible for a behaviour to serve an evolutionary
function without a person knowing what that function is. They simply need to
want to do it, even if they do not know why. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;">As side-note I’d like to point out that there is a
common misconception often advanced by people who really ought to know better that evolutionary psychology
assumes that <i>everything </i>that people
do is somehow an evolutionary adaptation and that evolutionary psychologists
cannot or will not acknowledge that some behaviours are simply by-products of
other adaptations with no special function of their own. This is a gross
misrepresentation of what evolutionary psychology is </span>about<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><sup>[i]</sup></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><sup> </sup></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">and in fairness to the authors of the study they were attempting to actually </span><i style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">test </i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">whether or not their hypothesis
about the adaptive function of oral sex is valid, rather than just assuming it
is. It is quite possible that oral sex has no evolutionary function in itself.
Humans are a highly sexed species compared to most mammals </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">(Diamond, 1998)</span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;"> and engage in many
non-procreative sexual acts, perhaps for pleasure alone. Oral sex might simply
be a by-product of this interest in sex that humans have. However, if it can be
shown that this particular behaviour appears to serve a definite purpose that
has an evolutionary history, a reasonable case can be made that it has an
adaptive function.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;">To test their hypotheses, the authors recruited
heterosexual males in committed relationships that had lasted at least one
year. These were asked a series of questions about how attractive they thought their
partners were (to themselves and to other men); about their relationship
satisfaction; and their most recent sexual experience. Participants were asked
to rate their interest in and duration of oral sex compared to what is
“typical” for them. I thought the wording of these questions was somewhat
peculiar. One man’s “typical” level of interest in oral sex might be quite
different from another man’s, so asking the questions in this way would seem to
make individual responses difficult to compare. Their reasons for asking about
the participants’ most recent experience in particular was also not made clear.
<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;">The results were much as the authors’
expected. “Recurrent risk of sperm competition”
(attractiveness) predicted interest in performing oral sex independently of
relationship length, relationship satisfaction, and duration of intercourse.
The latter three were not significant when recurrent risk/attractiveness was
taken into account. Recurrent risk and duration of intercourse each predicted
duration of oral sex independently of relationship length and relationship
satisfaction. This indicates that the more attractive a man found his partner,
the more interested he was in performing oral sex, and the longer he performed
it for. The authors took this as evidence in support of their hypothesis that
oral sex functions to detect infidelity when recurrent risk of sperm
competition is high. However, there is an alternative explanation seems more
obvious that the authors seem to have overlooked. This is that the more attractive a man finds his partner, the
more interested he would be in performing sex acts in general with her. That
is, greater attraction would produce greater sexual excitement generally, and
hence greater willingness to engage in a variety of sexual acts. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;">I think it is also worth noting that recurrent
risk/attractiveness had rather modest sized correlations with interest in oral
sex and duration of performance (.26 and .24 respectively). These are not
trivial sized correlations compared to most findings in psychology, but they do
suggest that other factors besides partner attractiveness are related to a
man’s willingness to perform oral sex. For example, it has been argued that
heterosexual men demonstrate their masculinity through their ability to “master”
women’s bodies, and that this may be manifested by skill in bringing a woman to
orgasm through oral sex (Backstrom, Armstrong,
& Puentes, 2011). Additionally, reciprocity may play a role. That
is, men perform oral sex with the expectation of receiving it in return. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> To their
credit, the authors do consider some alternative explanations of their findings
that could be considered in future studies. One of these is that men perform
oral sex to increase the woman’s sexual satisfaction. Research has found that
women are more sexually satisfied the more frequently they receive oral sex.
Other research has found that the more sexually satisfied a woman is, the less
likely she is to be unfaithful. Female sexual satisfaction was not assessed in
this study, and the authors acknowledge that future research should consider
whether the relationship between attractiveness and male interest in oral sex
remains after taking into account desire to satisfy the partner. This seems to
me like a very reasonable alternative explanation. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;">The other alternative they considered, which I
consider to be much more speculative, is based on the idea that a woman retains
more sperm in her uterus when she has an orgasm. Hence men might perform oral
sex to increase the chance the woman will have an orgasm, and therefore retain
more of the man’s sperm. This idea is based on a study by Baker and Bellis (1993) which actually claimed to have found
that female orgasm increased sperm retention, but </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">only when it </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;">occurred
between one minute before and 45 minutes after ejaculation. Orgasm occurring
more than one minute before ejaculation had no effect on sperm retention
according to this study. If Baker and Bellis are correct, performing oral sex
would not be effective in increasing sperm retention unless the timing was very
specific.</span><span style="vertical-align: super;">[ii] </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">In any case, Pham and Shackelford did not assess whether female orgasm
occurred.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhjDyda8txVYS_iStOO5_Poi-CXnaEHhYXrv1oyRGc3XFsBd7ngscJ27-gnGE8EF9_x2CY5FT0ITFNdt9RiUbV1_cNNv-JH0XuJnFukp_jAy4WOuWK7qT1r7jK-ZmDt1W67Ms1EzcT-wro/s1600/demotivational-poster-66485.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="210" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhjDyda8txVYS_iStOO5_Poi-CXnaEHhYXrv1oyRGc3XFsBd7ngscJ27-gnGE8EF9_x2CY5FT0ITFNdt9RiUbV1_cNNv-JH0XuJnFukp_jAy4WOuWK7qT1r7jK-ZmDt1W67Ms1EzcT-wro/s320/demotivational-poster-66485.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;">I would argue that although the Pham and Shackelford
study is an interesting one, the results are an inconclusive test of their
hypotheses because there are alternative explanations for their findings. Some
of these alternative explanations, such as those involving female satisfaction,
and my own hypothesis that female attractiveness generally increases male
interest in sexual activity seem like more obvious explanations. This does not
necessarily mean that the authors are incorrect, only that more research is
needed to test these different explanations. For example, studies might assess
whether men with more attractive partners are also more interested in other
activities associated with sexual foreplay, such as kissing and so on. It would
then be possible to test whether interest in oral sex is independent of
interest in these other activities. It is also possible that oral sex might
serve a combination of functions and that all of these hypotheses have a grain
of truth. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Finally, it might be a good idea to consider the
woman’s perspective. Pham and Shackelford seem to portray women as passive
recipients of male interest and do not appear to consider female agency. For
example, they talk about attractive women as targets for mate poaching and consider </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 18px;">“recurrent risk of sperm competition” purely in terms of the woman’s attractiveness to other men.</span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">While
it may be true that men are more likely to target attractive women for affairs,
it is also the case that the woman actually has a say in the matter. Some women
are more likely to be unfaithful than others and this may be related to her
character and choices as much as her looks. </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 18px;">Furthermore, </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 18px;">if the function of cunnilingus was to detect whether a woman had been sexually active with another male, it would seem reasonable that if she had in fact been unfaithful she might try to avoid receiving cunnilingus to avoid detection. </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Pham and Shackelford’s study does
not consider the woman’s desires and her actual willingness to be unfaithful.
Future studies might consider whether men are more likely to perform oral sex
on a woman who may present a “recurrent risk of sperm competition” due to her
own desires and her actual willingness to be unfaithful.</span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" />
<div id="edn1">
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i>Footnotes</i></b><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14px;">[i]</span></span></span></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"> Stephen Jay Gould seems to have originated this particular canard about evolutionary psychologists being “pan-adaptationists” who are too blind to see that many features of the human psyche have no evolutionary function in themselves. See this </span><a href="http://cogweb.ucla.edu/Debate/CEP_Gould.html"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;">article</span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"> by Tooby and Cosmides, leading figures in the field, which shows how Gould completely misrepresented their work, in which they explicitly stated that most human behaviours are probably by-products without an evolutionary function.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div id="edn2">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14px;">[ii]</span></span></span></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"> It is also worth noting that the Baker and Bellis study has been strongly </span><a href="http://www.arlindo-correia.com/241005.html"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;">disputed</span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"> by Elisabeth Lloyd on the basis that the sample size was too small to draw any reliable conclusions. The findings by Baker and Bellis do not appear to have been replicated so their claims might be taken with a grain of salt. </span></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><b>Further reading</b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Pham and colleagues performed a companion <a href="http://www.toddkshackelford.com/downloads/Pham-Shackelford-Sela-PAID.pdf" target="_blank">study </a>considering women's interest in fellatio, with rather different results. I have written a critique of this study <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201306/infidelity-detection-and-women-s-interest-in-oral-sex" target="_blank">here</a>. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Follow me on </span></i></b><a href="https://www.facebook.com/UniqueLikeEverybodyElse"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Facebook,</span></i></b></a>
<a href="https://plus.google.com/b/116570783533948602312/116570783533948602312/posts"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Google
Plus</span></i></b></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">, or </span></i></b><a href="https://twitter.com/ScottAMcGreal"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Twitter</span></i></b></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">© Scott McGreal. Please do not reproduce without
permission. Brief excerpts may be quoted as long as a link to the original
article is provided. </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">This article also appears on Psychology Today on
my blog <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201302/does-oral-sex-have-evolutionary-purpose-0" target="_blank">Unique - Like Everybody Else</a>.</span><span style="color: red;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="MsoHyperlink"><b>Other posts
about sex and psychology<o:p></o:p></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201212/porn-stars-and-evolutionary-psychology">Porn
Stars and Evolutionary Psychology</a><span class="MsoHyperlink"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201301/the-personalities-porn-stars">The
Personalities of Porn Stars</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201211/are-sex-and-religion-natural-enemies">Are
Sex and Religion Natural Enemies?</a> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/the-pseudoscience-race-differences-in-penis-size">The
Pseudoscience of Race Differences in Penis Size</a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/semen-antidepressant-think-again">Semen
an Antidepressant? Think Again</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><b><br /></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;">References
<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-no-proof: yes;">Backstrom, L., Armstrong, E. A., & Puentes, J. (2011).
Women's Negotiation of Cunnilingus in College Hookups and Relationships. <i>Journal of Sex Research, 49</i>(1), 1-12.
doi: 10.1080/00224499.2011.585523</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-no-proof: yes;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-no-proof: yes;">Baker, R. R., & Bellis, M. A. (1993). Human sperm
competition: ejaculate manipulation by females and a function for the female
orgasm. <i>Animal Behaviour, 46</i>(5),
887-909. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/anbe.1993.1272</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-no-proof: yes;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-no-proof: yes;">Diamond, J. (1998). <i>Why
Is Sex Fun?</i> : Basic Books.</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-no-proof: yes;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 36pt; text-indent: -36pt;">
<span class="Z3988" title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.jtitle=Personality+and+Individual+Differences&rft_id=info%3Adoi%2F10.1016%2Fj.paid.2012.11.034&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fresearchblogging.org&rft.atitle=Oral+sex+as+infidelity-detection&rft.issn=01918869&rft.date=2013&rft.volume=54&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=792&rft.epage=795&rft.artnum=http%3A%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com%2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS0191886912005764&rft.au=Pham%2C+M.&rft.au=Shackelford%2C+T.&rfe_dat=bpr3.included=1;bpr3.tags=Psychology%2CPersonality%2C+%2C+Evolutionary+Psychology%2C+Sex">Pham, M., & Shackelford, T. (2013). Oral sex as infidelity-detection <span style="font-style: italic;">Personality and Individual Differences, 54</span> (6), 792-795 DOI: <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.11.034" rev="review">10.1016/j.paid.2012.11.034</a></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div>
<br />
<div id="edn2">
</div>
</div>
Scott McGrealhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13757633582829269183noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2304269645366413372.post-85209528859899420182013-05-31T15:08:00.000+10:002013-10-16T17:46:04.388+11:00Could sexbots one day give people longer life? Dream on!<div class="MsoNormal">
Recently, I came across an <a href="http://transhumanity.net/articles/entry/sexbots-will-give-us-longevity-orgasms">article</a>
on a transhumanist website that made the amazing claim that in the
not-so-distant future, people will improve their life expectancy by having sex
with robots programmed to give them ‘super-orgasms.’ Transhumanists believe
that it will one day be possible to vastly expand the human lifespan through
technology. Various means of extending human longevity have been proposed but
this seems like one of the wackier ones. The author of this article is not alone in the belief that human lifespan can be extended through sex. Celebrity medic Dr
Mehmet Oz goes so far as to <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffbercovici/2013/01/28/dr-ozs-five-wackiest-medical-beliefs/">advise</a>
people that if they have 200 orgasms a year they will extend their life by six
years. While there is some evidence linking more frequent orgasms to longer
life, the claims by Dr Oz and (some) transhumanists extrapolate far beyond the
available evidence. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhLtcz8YCsaliugkL4W421k1EOrM4_1GEmDu8Qc_GmsoucUrzJGpjvsfQ417JuY-1jcr6r0IGkLGPaU9dAf1wMJvvjgTpv3xkEGYE0dkg4UNVyvwqRt3PIs35FHJPOrubt6-Zs8KSnYSD0/s1600/robot+on+spaceship.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhLtcz8YCsaliugkL4W421k1EOrM4_1GEmDu8Qc_GmsoucUrzJGpjvsfQ417JuY-1jcr6r0IGkLGPaU9dAf1wMJvvjgTpv3xkEGYE0dkg4UNVyvwqRt3PIs35FHJPOrubt6-Zs8KSnYSD0/s320/robot+on+spaceship.jpg" width="231" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: Arial, sans-serif;">Image courtesy of Victor Habbick at<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></i><a href="http://www.freedigitalphotos.net/" target="_blank"><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">FreeDigitalPhotos.net</span></i></a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There have been a number of research studies linking sexual
activity with longevity, but these findings need to be interpreted with a
certain amount of caution because a statistical association between sex and
longevity does not necessarily prove that one leads to the other. Additionally,
the relationship between sexual activity and longevity may be different for men
and women. For example, there have been studies linking frequency of orgasm (Smith, Frankel, & Yarnell, 1997) and of
sexual intercourse (Palmore, 1982) in men
to longer life. The study by Smith et al. controlled for factors such as age,
smoking, <span class="MsoHyperlink">social class, and baseline coronary heart disease,
and remarkably still found that men who had the most frequent orgasms (twice a
week or more) had a 50% lower mortality rate compared to men with the lowest
frequency of orgasm (less than once a month). However, this study did not take
relationship status into account. Additionally, for women, frequency of
intercourse did not predict longevity, but past enjoyment of intercourse did
(Palmore, 1982). Palmore suggested that quantity of sexual activity may be more
important for men’s health, whereas for women the quality is of more
importance. The author admitted though that we cannot say for sure whether more
frequent or better sex is what actually leads to longer life. An alternative
possibility is that people who are in better health have more frequent sex
and/or enjoy it more. If this is the case, better health might explain the
association between sexual activity and longer life. It is worth noting that in
Palmore’s study health ratings were the strongest predictors of how long people
lived. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="MsoHyperlink"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="MsoHyperlink">Although Palmore’s study found that
in women frequency of intercourse generally was unrelated to longevity, another
study found a relationship between frequency of orgasm during intercourse and
longevity in women (Seldin, Friedman, &
Martin, 2002). There is considerable variability among women in whether
and how often they reach orgasm during intercourse. Some women reach orgasm
regularly, others occasionally, and others not at all. (See this </span><a href="http://www.lehmiller.com/blog/2013/2/1/sex-question-friday-what-percentage-of-women-reach-orgasm-fr.html">post</a><span class="MsoHyperlink"> for further discussion of these differences, and this </span><a href="http://www.lehmiller.com/blog/2012/2/6/why-are-some-women-able-to-reach-orgasm-during-intercourse-b.html">post</a><span class="MsoHyperlink"> discussing possible reasons why this occurs.) Seldin et
al. found that women who described themselves as less neurotic and those who
tended to drink more alcohol had a somewhat higher frequency of orgasm during
intercourse. In fact, the relationship between orgasm frequency and longevity
only approached significance after taking neuroticism and alcohol use into
account.</span><a href="file:///C:/Users/dse721/Documents/misc/blog/sexbots/Longer%20life%20through%20sexbots%20plain.docx#_edn1" name="_ednref1" title=""><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-AU; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">[i]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></a><span class="MsoHyperlink"> It is possible that individual differences in the ability
of women to achieve orgasm during sex might be related to longevity. That is,
women who are more orgasmic might be healthier in other ways that affect their
life expectancy. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="MsoHyperlink"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="MsoHyperlink">According to </span><a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/secrets-longevity/201102/orgasms-health-and-longevity-does-sex-promote-health">Howard
Friedman</a>, one of the authors of the Seldin et al. paper, frequency of
orgasm in women was linked to their sexual satisfaction, and sexual
satisfaction was linked to marital satisfaction. Dr Friedman was careful to
point that although all these factors were correlated we do not have enough
information to know what was causing what. It might be that more orgasms lead
to greater sexual satisfaction which in turn improves marital satisfaction.
However, the converse could also be true. That is couples who are more
satisfied with their marriages generally might have more frequent sex, leading
to greater sexual satisfaction. Couples who are unhappy in their marriages,
e.g. if they fight frequently, have little intimacy, poor communication, etc.
will probably have less frequent sex and less sexual satisfaction. So there is
probably a two-way relationship between sexual satisfaction and marital
satisfaction.<span class="MsoHyperlink"><span style="color: windowtext;"> </span></span>Therefore, marital satisfaction might
be as important for longevity as orgasm frequency. People who are in stable
loving supportive relationships may be healthier and live longer than those who
are in disharmonious relationships. <span class="MsoHyperlink">This seems
applicable to the studies on male sexual frequency cited earlier, which did not
address why some men are more sexually active than others. Men who have more
frequent sex might be in better quality relationships (or in a relationship at
all) than men who have infrequent sex. </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="MsoHyperlink"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Although there is evidence of a connection between orgasms
and longer life, there is simply not enough information available to justify
statements by Dr Oz to the effect that if one has a certain number of orgasms a
year, one will increase one’s life expectancy by a certain number of years.
Similarly, claims by transhumanists that using sex robots to induce
“super-orgasms” will induce longer life overlook the human factors involved.
Whilst it may be conceivable that people in the future may use robots to
enhance sexual pleasure, similar to the way some people use sex toys, it hardly
seems likely that people will use them as substitutes for marital partners.
Without the element of marital satisfaction, it is debatable whether orgasms
alone will produce the same benefit to life expectancy. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Another difference between robot and human partners that might
be important is that of intentions. Robots are designed to just do what they
are programmed to do, and do not have desires of their own. Humans on the other
hand do have desires and intentions, and this affects how their behaviour is
perceived by others. In particular, there is evidence that one’s perceptions
about the intentions of another person can affect how physical pleasure is
perceived. That is, an experience may be perceived as more enjoyable if one
believes that the person providing the experience actually intends for one to
experience pleasure than if they do not. This was tested in an experiment in
which participants received a back massage from a specially designed chair (Gray, 2012). When participants believed that
the chair was being controlled by another person who had freely chosen to give
them a massage they perceived the experience as more pleasurable then when they
thought it was being randomly administered by a computer. In actuality, in both
cases, the decision to administer massage was determined by a computer, but the
participants were led to believe otherwise. Although not yet tested it may be
possible that people may perceive sexual activity as more pleasurable when it
is performed with someone they believe is actually intending to give them
pleasure, as compared with similar activity with a machine that has no feelings
about the matter. Perhaps, the health benefits associated with sexual activity
are tied up with the sense of being cared about by another person. Machines may
not be able to provide this sense of caring. Of course, if it ever comes to
pass that robots are invented that are indistinguishable from real human
beings, much like in the film <i>Blade
Runner</i>, machines might actually replace humans as both sexual and marital
partners<i>. </i>Personally, I don’t think
this will happen any time soon. In any case, before such an event does occur,
people would need to decide if such a situation is even desirable. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" />
<div id="edn1">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 10pt;">[1]</span></span></span> For the statistically minded, this effect was described by the authors as “marginally significant” (<i>p</i> < .10) and hence did not actually reach a conventional level of statistical significance.<br />
<br />
<b>Post Script</b><br />
It has come to my attention that some transhumanists consider that transhumanity.net, the source of the article that inspired this post, is not a credible source of information about their views. Therefore, the remarks in my blog post should be taken as being in response to a specific article on that website, rather than a broader reflection on what transhumanists in general believe. </div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Follow me on </span></i></b><a href="https://www.facebook.com/UniqueLikeEverybodyElse"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Facebook,</span></i></b></a>
<a href="https://plus.google.com/b/116570783533948602312/116570783533948602312/posts"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Google
Plus</span></i></b></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">, or </span></i></b><a href="https://twitter.com/ScottAMcGreal"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Twitter</span></i></b></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">© Scott McGreal. Please do not reproduce without
permission. Brief excerpts may be quoted as long as a link to the original
article is provided. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">This article also appears on Psychology Today on
my blog <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201302/longer-life-through-sexbots-dream" target="_blank">Unique - Like Everybody Else</a>.</span><span style="color: red;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="MsoHyperlink"><b>Other posts
about sex and psychology<o:p></o:p></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="MsoHyperlink"><a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201212/porn-stars-and-evolutionary-psychology">Porn
Stars and Evolutionary Psychology</a><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201301/the-personalities-porn-stars">The
Personalities of Porn Stars</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201211/are-sex-and-religion-natural-enemies">Are
Sex and Religion Natural Enemies?</a> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201302/does-oral-sex-have-evolutionary-purpose-0">Does
Oral Sex have an Evolutionary Purpose?</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/the-pseudoscience-race-differences-in-penis-size">The
Pseudoscience of Race Differences in Penis Size</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/semen-antidepressant-think-again">Semen
an Antidepressant? Think Again</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="float: left; padding: 5px;"><a href="http://www.researchblogging.org/"><img alt="ResearchBlogging.org" src="http://www.researchblogging.org/public/citation_icons/rb2_large_gray.png" style="border: 0;" /></a></span><br />
<b>References <o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
<span class="Z3988" title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.jtitle=Social+Psychological+and+Personality+Science&rft_id=info%3Adoi%2F10.1177%2F1948550611433470&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fresearchblogging.org&rft.atitle=The+Power+of+Good+Intentions%3A+Perceived+Benevolence+Soothes+Pain%2C+Increases+Pleasure%2C+and+Improves+Taste&rft.issn=1948-5506&rft.date=2012&rft.volume=3&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=639&rft.epage=645&rft.artnum=http%3A%2F%2Fspp.sagepub.com%2Fcgi%2Fdoi%2F10.1177%2F1948550611433470&rft.au=Gray%2C+K.&rfe_dat=bpr3.included=1;bpr3.tags=Psychology%2CPersonality%2C+Social+Psychology">Gray, K. (2012). The Power of Good Intentions: Perceived Benevolence Soothes Pain, Increases Pleasure, and Improves Taste <span style="font-style: italic;">Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3</span> (5), 639-645 DOI: <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1948550611433470" rev="review">10.1177/1948550611433470</a></span><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
Palmore, E. B. (1982). Predictors of the Longevity
Difference: A 25-Year Follow-Up. <i>The
Gerontologist, 22</i>(6), 513-518. doi: 10.1093/geront/22.6.513<o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
Seldin, D. R., Friedman, H. S., & Martin, L. R.
(2002). Sexual activity as a predictor of life-span mortality risk. <i>Personality and Individual Differences, 33</i>(3),
409-425. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(01)00164-7<o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 36.0pt; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
<span class="Z3988" title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.jtitle=The+Journal+of+Urology&rft_id=info%3Adoi%2F10.1016%2FS0022-5347%2801%2962990-2&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fresearchblogging.org&rft.atitle=Sex+and+Death%3A+Are+They+Related%3F+Findings+From+the+Caerphilly+Cohort+Study&rft.issn=00225347&rft.date=1998&rft.volume=160&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=628&rft.epage=&rft.artnum=http%3A%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com%2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS0022534701629902&rft.au=Smith%2C+G.&rft.au=Frankel%2C+S.&rft.au=Yarnell%2C+J.&rfe_dat=bpr3.included=1;bpr3.tags=Psychology%2CSex%2C+Health%2C+Longevity">Smith, G., Frankel, S., & Yarnell, J. (1998). Sex and Death: Are They Related? Findings From the Caerphilly Cohort Study <span style="font-style: italic;">The Journal of Urology, 160</span> (2) DOI: <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(01)62990-2" rev="review">10.1016/S0022-5347(01)62990-2</a></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div>
<br />
<div id="edn1">
</div>
</div>
Scott McGrealhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13757633582829269183noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2304269645366413372.post-39039045923753289242013-05-22T22:13:00.001+10:002013-10-16T17:36:16.757+11:00Twitter versus the Grim Reaper: Extraverts but not introverts use Twitter to ward off existential anxiety<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="float: left; padding: 5px;"><a href="http://www.researchblogging.org/"><img alt="ResearchBlogging.org" src="http://www.researchblogging.org/public/citation_icons/rb2_large_gray.png" style="border: 0;" /></a></span><br />
As Twitter has grown in popularity, a number of research studies have examined motivations for using this microblogging platform. A recent <a href="http://www3.ntu.edu.sg/home/linqiu/publications/cyberpsychology2010.pdf" target="_blank">study </a>drawing on the framework of Terror Management Theory, made the intriguing finding that when confronted with a reminder of one’s eventual
death, extraverts increased their Twitter usage while introverts avoided it
altogether. Extraverts and introverts appear to have different ways of coping
with existential threats that could affect their use of social networking. This
might shed some light on the purpose of a large amount of apparently
“pointless” communication that occurs on this site.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkXY838JJrqaz9XdUu5lp7Yc7bYNYucxz5ALBYAZd0Jv_Lnjgi9632as8T8gcIShzEDA9dyivfybVcJsBlFuLPptvM922lUoX-nG7fSnOaicEPOg43J3WhcxAeil4IzV1Hmh6At4z9euk/s1600/twitter+skull.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkXY838JJrqaz9XdUu5lp7Yc7bYNYucxz5ALBYAZd0Jv_Lnjgi9632as8T8gcIShzEDA9dyivfybVcJsBlFuLPptvM922lUoX-nG7fSnOaicEPOg43J3WhcxAeil4IzV1Hmh6At4z9euk/s1600/twitter+skull.png" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 11px; text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Grappling with ultimate concerns in 140 characters or less?</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Twitter differs
other social networking sites such as <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/is-there-something-wrong-people-who-do-not-use-facebook" target="_blank">Facebook </a>in that messages are restricted
to very short lengths (up to 140 characters) and messages are generally
immediately visible to the general public, not just a user’s followers. This
contrasts with typical Facebook usage, where users generally only allow mutual
“friends” to see their status updates and their personal profiles. Thus
people’s Facebook profiles tend to be more private, whereas typically a
person’s Twitter profile can be viewed by anybody. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So what exactly are people on Twitter sharing with the wider
world? According to one <a href="http://www.pearanalytics.com/blog/2009/twitter-study-reveals-interesting-results-40-percent-pointless-babble/">survey</a>
of Twitter, the most common type of content shared (over 40% of all tweets) was
“pointless babble,” that is, banal updates about day-to-day activities (e.g.
“ate a salad”). Some commentators have disputed this description, <a href="http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2009/08/16/twitter_pointle.html">arguing</a>
that such updates are better described as “social grooming” or “peripheral
social awareness.” That is, even though they may seem pointless to outside
observers these messages may fulfil some meaningful function for the person.
What exactly this function is remains unclear. A recent study explored two
possible functions that Twitter usage might serve: restoring a sense of social
inclusion after ostracism, and alleviating existential threat (Qiu et al.,
2010). <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This study involved two experiments, in both of which
participants were given access to a pre-existing Twitter account with 30
followers and given opportunities to send brief messages if they wished. The
experimenter created the impression that other users were currently online and
able to read the participants’ messages by sending two updates about mundane
activities (e.g. “helping a friend”). Additionally, participants were assessed
on their Big Five personality traits (extraversion, agreeableness,
conscientiousness, neuroticism, and openness to experience). <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The first experiment tested whether participants who had
been experimentally ostracised would send more tweets compared to those who had
not. Most people experience ostracism, or deliberate social exclusion as highly aversive and following ostracism people become motivated to restore a sense of social connection. However, the
experimenters found that ostracised participants sent no more tweets than
non-ostracised ones, contrary to expectations. The authors thought this
indicated that sending brief messages to strangers does not satisfy a person’s
need for social inclusion after being ostracised. Perhaps this is because users
do not expect random strangers to respond to their tweets. After all, is there
a point to communicating if others do not respond? The second experiment
suggested another possibility. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The purpose of the second experiment was to test the effects
of a reminder of one’s own mortality on Twitter usage. A large body of research
known as Terror Management Theory (TMT) has found that being reminded of the
fact that one will eventually die creates a sense of existential threat that
people attempt to cope with in a number of ways (Hart,
Shaver, & Goldenberg, 2005). The most well-researched coping methods
are cultural worldview defence (e.g. “My country, my people, are really
great!”), bolstering self-esteem (“ I'm great!”) and seeking closeness with
loved ones (“someone cares about me”). These coping methods seem to provide a
buffer against existential anxiety by reinforcing a sense that one is special,
important, and connected with something larger than one’s self, and not merely
an insignificant creature with a fleeting existence.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Qiu et al. argued that Twitter usage could help alleviate
existential anxiety by providing participants with a means to affirm their own
existence, that is, to announce to the world in effect “I am alive!” To test
this, participants were asked to write either a brief essay about their own
death (mortality salience condition) or about a neutral topic (control
condition). Then they were provided with a series of opportunities to tweet
messages if they wished. What the researchers found was that there was an
effect of mortality salience but this depended on the personality trait of
extraversion. Specifically, after mortality salience highly extraverted
participants sent more tweets (nearly 10 on average) compared to their
counterparts in the control condition
whereas highly introverted participants sent less (about zero on
average). In the control condition there was no difference between extraverted
and introverted participants in number of tweets sent (3 – 4 on average). <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Qiu et al. did not attempt to explain why extraverted and
introverted participants responded to existential threat so differently, or
even why their Twitter usage did not differ in the control condition.
Extraversion is associated with greater sociability so the fact that in the
control condition extraverts did not make greater usage of this social
networking tool seems a little surprising. However, previous research has found
that social motives do not predict how much time a person spends using Twitter
(Johnson & Yang, 2009), suggesting that under routine circumstances a
person’s sociability may not be that important to how much they use this
medium. However, this might change when a person experiences an existential
threat. Extraverts might see Twitter usage as a good way to proclaim their
existence to other people, even if these others are complete strangers who may
have little interest in the minutiae of one’s life. Introverts appear to adopt
a different strategy, so perhaps they feel a need to turn inward and be within
themselves as a way of reaffirming their own existence. For introverts
experiencing an existential threat, sending banal messages to strangers might
seem like a superficial distraction from deeper concerns. For extraverts, such
a distraction might be just what they need. The fact that they are strangers
might seem less important to them than that they are a potential audience. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Some limitations of the study are worth noting. Participants
were assigned a pre-existing Twitter account with random strangers as
followers. This may not adequately reflect how people use the service in real
life. Additionally, the researchers assessed participants on five personality
traits yet presented results relevant to only one of them. With five sets of
results, the odds are increased that statistically significant findings could
occur by chance alone. Additionally, the outcome measure was the number of
tweets sent and their content was not assessed. It would be interesting to
explore whether message content after mortality salience differed from the
control condition based on personality traits. For example, people high in
neuroticism might have been more disturbed than others by writing about death
and their tweets might perhaps have reflected this (e.g. “I’m freaking out about
this experiment!”). Additionally, it would have been interesting to see if
participants’ messages after mortality salience involved efforts to bolster
self-esteem or defend their cultural world-view, which are also known to help
buffer against existential threat. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This study is the first one that I know of to apply
principles of TMT to social networking usage. As social networking continues to
gain in popularity I would welcome more such research. I think this study shows
that what may appear to some to be “pointless babble” may actually serve a
deeper purpose, depending on one’s personality and momentary needs.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
<b><i>Other articles concerning social media:</i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<a data-mce-href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/is-there-something-wrong-people-who-do-not-use-facebook" href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/is-there-something-wrong-people-who-do-not-use-facebook" target="_blank">Is there something wrong with people who don't use Facebook?</a> What research really says about non-users. One of my most popular posts!</div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<a data-mce-href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201303/the-misunderstood-personality-profile-wikipedia-members" href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201303/the-misunderstood-personality-profile-wikipedia-members" target="_blank">The Misunderstood Personality Profile of Wikipedia Members</a> Contrary to a widely reported study, Wikipedians are not close-minded at all. </div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Follow me on </span></i></b><a href="https://www.facebook.com/UniqueLikeEverybodyElse"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Facebook,</span></i></b></a>
<a href="https://plus.google.com/b/116570783533948602312/116570783533948602312/posts"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Google
Plus</span></i></b></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">, or </span></i></b><a href="https://twitter.com/ScottAMcGreal"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Twitter</span></i></b></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">© Scott McGreal. Please do not reproduce without
permission. Brief excerpts may be quoted as long as a link to the original
article is provided. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">This article also appears on Psychology Today on
my blog <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201301/twitter-and-mortality-tweet-or-not-tweet" target="_blank">Unique - Like Everybody Else</a>.</span><span style="color: red;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>References <o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 36.0pt; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=2304269645366413372" name="_ENREF_1">Hart, J., Shaver, P. R., &
Goldenberg, J. L. (2005). Attachment, Self-Esteem, Worldviews, and Terror
Management: Evidence for a Tripartite Security System. <i>Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88</i>(6), 999 - 1013. </a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 36.0pt; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=2304269645366413372" name="_ENREF_1"><br /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Johnson,
P. and Yang, S.<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>, 2009-08-05<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background-color: whitesmoke; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"> </span></span>"Uses and Gratifications of
Twitter: An Examination of User Motives and Satisfaction of Twitter Use"<i> Paper
presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism
and Mass Communication, Sheraton Boston, Boston, MA</i><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background-color: whitesmoke; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"> </span></span><i>Online</i>. 2012-06-20<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>from<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p376367_index.html<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="Z3988" title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.jtitle=Studies+in+health+technology+and+informatics&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F20543286&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fresearchblogging.org&rft.atitle=Understanding+the+psychological+motives+behind+microblogging.&rft.issn=0926-9630&rft.date=2010&rft.volume=154&rft.issue=&rft.spage=140&rft.epage=4&rft.artnum=&rft.au=Qiu+L&rft.au=Leung+AK&rft.au=Ho+JH&rft.au=Yeung+QM&rft.au=Francis+KJ&rft.au=Chua+PF&rfe_dat=bpr3.included=1;bpr3.tags=Psychology%2CPersonality%2C+Social+Psychology%2C+Social+Networking%2C+Terror+Management+Theory">Qiu L, Leung AK, Ho JH, Yeung QM, Francis KJ, & Chua PF (2010). Understanding the psychological motives behind microblogging. <span style="font-style: italic;">Studies in health technology and informatics, 154</span>, 140-4 PMID: <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20543286" rev="review">20543286</a></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Scott McGrealhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13757633582829269183noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2304269645366413372.post-78072387797262689622013-05-16T21:34:00.000+10:002013-10-16T17:49:27.169+11:00The effectiveness of placebo treatment for pain is related to personality traits<span style="float: left; padding: 5px;"><a href="http://www.researchblogging.org/"><img alt="ResearchBlogging.org" src="http://www.researchblogging.org/public/citation_icons/rb2_large_gray.png" style="border: 0;" /></a></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Medical researchers have long known that placebo treatments
can produce real effects, such as pain relief. Personality traits are also
known to influence a person’s response to treatments for certain conditions. A
recent <a href="http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/33300/title/Personality-Predicts-Placebo-Effect/">study</a>
has found that personality traits appear to influence how strongly a person
responds to a placebo treatment for pain. Personality traits associated with
self-control and the regulation of anger in particular were associated with
greater pain relief. This raises the possibility that improving a person’s
self-control and ability to manage anger could also improve their ability to
control pain.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhvSnx6MI5pihKXUkFlJfxRcQEdrsnLVYs7iVIipWcjJSRMVPpG8Ny9YnvDsQRWp25_yBQEWvGBE-qVIBxihTU82KJQ97JfniQ7telKKznu7nO4YTyorX1Heazdvxbvf1JSEj8PqRkFy80/s1600/woman+in+pain.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhvSnx6MI5pihKXUkFlJfxRcQEdrsnLVYs7iVIipWcjJSRMVPpG8Ny9YnvDsQRWp25_yBQEWvGBE-qVIBxihTU82KJQ97JfniQ7telKKznu7nO4YTyorX1Heazdvxbvf1JSEj8PqRkFy80/s320/woman+in+pain.jpg" width="212" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 10px; line-height: 11px; text-align: start;">Image courtesy of Michal Marcol at FreeDigitalPhotos.net</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In this study, volunteers received a series of four
injections while receiving PET scans to monitor brain activity (Peciña et al., 2012). Two of the injections
were designed to be painless and the other two were intended to be quite
painful. Participants were not told in advance which injection they would
receive so as not to bias their expectations. After receiving one of the
painful injections they were administered a substance that they were told would
relieve the pain but which was actually an inert saline solution with no analgesic
properties. This placebo treatment produced a significant reduction in pain.
Pain was rated both subjectively (by self-ratings of pain intensity) and
objectively (changes in opioid receptor function observed through PET scans).
Pain relief tended to be stronger in participants who rated themselves higher
in the personality traits of ego resiliency and agreeableness and lower in
neuroticism. Agreeableness and neuroticism each consist of a number of narrower
facets that were also examined. The facets that predicted placebo response most
strongly were high altruism and straightforwardness (facets of agreeableness)
and low angry hostility (a neuroticism facet that is also related to low
agreeableness). <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Neuroticism is a trait associated with negative emotionality
People high in neuroticism tend to report more physical symptoms and
complaints, such as headaches and muscle tension and so on, than less neurotic
individuals (Ode & Robinson, 2007).
People high in neuroticism cope with pain more poorly than other people
probably because they tend to over-react emotionally. There is evidence linking
physical pain and negative emotions as neuroimaging studies have found that
endogenous opioid activity in a number of brain regions modulate both the
experience of physical pain and of negative emotions. Angry hostility was the
neuroticism facet that most strongly predicted (poor) placebo response in this
study. The authors stated that there is research evidence linking anger to
lower opioid receptor system functioning so this result was not surprising (Peciña, et al., 2012). <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Agreeableness is an interpersonal trait associated with
cooperativeness and concern for others. The authors of the study noted that
patients who are highly agreeable tend to have a better relationship with their
doctors as they take a frank and collaborative approach. Agreeable patients may
therefore respond more readily to treatment, even if the treatment is a
placebo. Additionally, agreeableness has been linked to placebo responses to
acupuncture. They also noted that PET scans showed that the placebo response
(that is, opioid receptor function) occurred in brain regions that respond to
observing pain in others, and therefore play a role in empathy. Agreeable
people tend to be empathetic to the suffering of others, so this overlap
between the brain regions associated with the placebo response and with empathy
might help explain the connection with agreeableness, particularly the altruism
facet. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Altruism is associated with selflessness and self-sacrifice
for the benefit of others. Perhaps people who are self-sacrificing are better
able to control pain? Perhaps, being able to suppress pain when needed
facilitates self-sacrifice because the pain and inconvenience of foregoing
one’s own interests for the benefit of another person becomes easier to bear.
Straightforwardness, the other agreeableness facet that predicted the placebo
response, is associated with honesty and openness in one’s communication with
others. One possible explanation for its connection with the placebo effect is
that people who are naturally honest may have been more likely to believe the
researcher when they were told they were being given a treatment that would
provide pain relief. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Agreeableness is also related to effortful self-control, in
particular the ability to control the expression of anger (Ode & Robinson, 2007). As noted
previously, anger has been linked to the opioid system, so this may another
reason that agreeableness is linked to the placebo effect. Another personality
trait linked to both self-control and the placebo effect is ego-resiliency. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Ego-resiliency might be described
as flexibility in self-control. That is, a person can inhibit their impulses
when required by the situation, and yet also allow him or herself to be
spontaneous and uninhibited when this is permitted. That is, the person can
adapt their level of self-expression to the demands of the situation. This in
contrast to people who are either chronically over-controlled – that is, unable
to loosen up when they need to – or under-controlled, unable to restrain their
impulses when expected to do so. Ego-resiliency assists a person in adapting to
stress and adversity as over-controlled individuals tend to respond in a stiff,
repetitive manner, whereas under-controlled people respond in a chaotic and
unfocused manner (Letzring, Block, & Funder,
2005). The researchers argue that ego-resiliency is associated
with positive emotions and adaptive changes in areas of the brain related to
reward and emotional processing. Specifically, there is evidence that this
trait may be associated with lower levels of activation of the dopamine system
during expectation of reward, and lower levels of dopamine in turn has been
associated with greater activation of endogenous opioid receptors during a
painful stressor (Peciña, et al., 2012). </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The findings that the placebo effect is linked to
personality traits associated with self-control, i.e. agreeableness and
ego-resiliency, suggests that the placebo effect is influenced by a person’s
capacity to regulate how they respond to adverse experiences. Even though the
placebo effect would seem to be outside of conscious awareness, it appears that
people who have developed the ability to regulate their emotions may also have
a greater ability to regulate pain. This might be because the brain regions
that modulate responses to pain (the opioid receptor systems) also are involved
in regulating negative emotions. Additionally, it could be the case that people
with greater self-control may take an attitude of active engagement to
treatment, even placebo treatment, as opposed to passively waiting to see what
happens. As a consequence they might respond more effectively. Emotional
regulation is a trainable skill. That is, psychologists can teach people
strategies to regulate how they experience and express their emotions to cope
more effectively with stress. Psychologists already teach anxiety management
strategies to people with chronic pain. It seems possible that training in
emotional regulation, such as anger management, could actually effect changes
in the opioid receptor system, resulting in a stronger placebo effect. This
might have implications for how people manage pain. Future research, such as
PET studies could determine whether training could have such an effect on the
brain and whether this assists in coping with pain. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p> </o:p><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Follow me on </span></i></b><a href="https://www.facebook.com/UniqueLikeEverybodyElse"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Facebook,</span></i></b></a>
<a href="https://plus.google.com/b/116570783533948602312/116570783533948602312/posts"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Google
Plus</span></i></b></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">, or </span></i></b><a href="https://twitter.com/ScottAMcGreal"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Twitter</span></i></b></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">.</span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">© Scott McGreal. Please do not reproduce without
permission. Brief excerpts may be quoted as long as a link to the original
article is provided. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">This article also appears on Psychology Today on
my blog <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201301/personality-and-pain-relief" target="_blank">Unique - Like Everybody Else</a>.</span><span style="color: red;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>References <o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
Letzring, T. D., Block, J., & Funder, D. C.
(2005). <a href="http://www.rap.ucr.edu/erecjrp.pdf">Ego-control and
ego-resiliency: Generalization of self-report scales based on personality
descriptions from acquaintances, clinicians, and the self.</a> <i>Journal of Research in Personality, 39</i>(4),
395-422. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2004.06.003<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
Ode, S., & Robinson, M. D. (2007). <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2703495/">Agreeableness and
the self-regulation of negative affect: Findings involving the
neuroticism/somatic distress relationship.</a> <i>Personality and Individual Differences, 43</i>(8),
2137-2148. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2007.06.035<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 36.0pt; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
<span style="color: #0000ee;"><u><span class="Z3988" title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.jtitle=Neuropsychopharmacology+%3A+official+publication+of+the+American+College+of+Neuropsychopharmacology&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F23187726&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fresearchblogging.org&rft.atitle=Personality+trait+predictors+of+placebo+analgesia+and+neurobiological+correlates.&rft.issn=0893-133X&rft.date=2013&rft.volume=38&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=639&rft.epage=46&rft.artnum=&rft.au=Peci%C3%B1a+M&rft.au=Azhar+H&rft.au=Love+TM&rft.au=Lu+T&rft.au=Fredrickson+BL&rft.au=Stohler+CS&rft.au=Zubieta+JK&rfe_dat=bpr3.included=1;bpr3.tags=Psychology%2CNeuroscience%2CPersonality%2C+Behavioral+Neuroscience">Peciña M, Azhar H, Love TM, Lu T, Fredrickson BL, Stohler CS, & Zubieta JK (2013). Personality trait predictors of placebo analgesia and neurobiological correlates. <span style="font-style: italic;">Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology, 38</span> (4), 639-46 PMID: <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23187726" rev="review">23187726</a></span></u></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Scott McGrealhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13757633582829269183noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2304269645366413372.post-59209636836895970372013-04-17T19:38:00.002+10:002014-11-07T13:42:57.498+11:00The Mental Health Troubles of the "Spiritual but not Religious" <br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 36.0pt;">
Scholars have increasingly investigated the relationship between
spirituality and/or religion and mental and physical health in recent years. It almost seems to have become conventional
wisdom that spirituality is associated with better health, mental and physical.
However, a recently published British study found that people who consider themselves
spiritual but not religious are more likely to have a mental disorder compared
to conventionally religious people and to those who are neither religious nor
spiritual. Conventionally religious people and those who were neither religious
nor spiritual did not differ in their mental health status, suggesting that
being religious offers few advantages in terms of mental health. The reasons
for this are still unclear. Studies on the psychology of spirituality offer
some clues as to why spiritual but not religious people might be prone to
poorer mental health although more research is needed to fully explain the
relationship. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 36.0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhkV1j29pKENZYr025_hCNKYdR7VQwDBbqQTG3qQe9fT6bCTaXamruIM10Yms3qn1Z7USuKpVVVsgdx_eWqsgP22_eQfaJrHfSyLQRL0ayJnz_4FxVZbaMFOhV2XYEBK3_c4vkB1bE40rs/s1600/starry-night.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhkV1j29pKENZYr025_hCNKYdR7VQwDBbqQTG3qQe9fT6bCTaXamruIM10Yms3qn1Z7USuKpVVVsgdx_eWqsgP22_eQfaJrHfSyLQRL0ayJnz_4FxVZbaMFOhV2XYEBK3_c4vkB1bE40rs/s320/starry-night.jpg" height="238" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 36.0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 36.0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 36.0pt;">
Recent scholarship has criticised claims that “spirituality” is
beneficial for mental health (see this <a href="http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/249341.php">article</a> for
example) based on the fact that definitions of spirituality
have been broadened so much that they imply mental health by definition (Koenig, 2008). Spirituality traditionally had
a narrow definition centred on belief in supernatural spirits such as God.
However, mental health services have
become increasingly interested in addressing the “spiritual” needs of consumers
in recent times, and as a result attempts have been made to redefine the term
in a way that would be maximally inclusive, so as to apply to people from
diverse religious backgrounds and to those with no religion (Koenig, 2008). Many studies have broadened the
term to incorporate a wide range of positive psychological concepts, such as
purpose in life, hopefulness, social connectedness, peacefulness and well-being
in general. This becomes problematic for research attempting to assess the
relationship between “spirituality” and mental health because by most
definitions good mental health implies that a person has some purpose in life,
is hopeful, socially connected and has peace and well-being. Thus it becomes a
meaningless tautology to say that spirituality is associated with better mental
health when the term is defined this way (Lindeman
& Aarnio, 2007). <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 36.0pt;">
A recent British study looked at
the relationship between spirituality and mental health using a more
traditional understanding of the term to avoid this problem of tautology (King et al., 2013). The study involved
in-depth interviews with over 7000 people in England. Participants were sorted
into those whose understanding of life was predominantly religious, spiritual,
or neither. These terms were explained in the following way: <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; mso-layout-grid-align: none; text-autospace: none; text-indent: 36.0pt;">
‘By religion, we mean the actual practice of a faith,
e.g. going to a temple, mosque, church or synagogue. Some people do not follow
a religion but do have spiritual beliefs or experiences. Some people make sense
of their lives without any religious or spiritual belief.’<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-layout-grid-align: none; text-autospace: none; text-indent: 36.0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 36.0pt;">
Participants were also
interviewed in depth about their mental health, alcohol and drug use, social
support, psychotropic medication usage, gambling, and were asked about
their overall happiness. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 36.0pt;">
The results showed that religious
participants were similar to non-religious/non-spiritual ones in regards to
their mental health in most respects, although the religious were less likely
to have used or been dependent on drugs in the last year. However, there were
striking differences for those in the spiritual but not religious category.
Compared to people who were neither religious nor spiritual, spiritual but not
religious people were more likely to take psychotropic medication, to use or be
dependent on recreational drugs, to have a generalised anxiety disorder,
phobia, or any neurotic disorder, or to have abnormal eating attitudes. These
differences still held even when taking into account social support and
physical health, as well as age, sex, and ethnicity. None of the groups
differed in their overall happiness though. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 36.0pt;">
The authors concluded that people
who are spiritual but not religious in their understanding of life are more
vulnerable to mental disorders than other people. The nature of the causal
relationship between spirituality and mental disorder is currently unknown. An
earlier British study had similar findings and the authors noted that it is
possible that not having a religious framework for one’s beliefs could lead to
mental disorder in people who have a need for a spiritual understanding of life
(King, Weich, Nazroo, & Blizard, 2006).
Alternatively, having a mental disorder might prompt a person to engage in a
spiritual quest in the hope of mental healing or deeper understanding of one’s
problems. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 36.0pt;">
Previous findings concerning the
personality traits associated with “spirituality” and religiosity might shed
some light onto the relationship between spirituality and mental disorder (Saucier & Skrzypińska, 2006). Spirituality
in this study was defined as “quest for meaning, unity, connectedness to
nature, humanity, and the transcendent.” Note that this definition focuses on
subjective and mystical understandings of life, in contrast to more
conventional religiosity which emphasises adherence to orthodox belief systems.
Although many people describe themselves in terms of both conventional
religiosity and subjective spirituality, people who were more focused on
subjective spirituality and less interested in religiosity tended to have
distinctly different personality characteristics compared to those with a more
orthodox religious orientation. People who described themselves in conventional
religious terms tended to be fairly conservative in their attitudes and
beliefs. Those who were more spiritual and less religious tended to be more
non-conforming and even peculiar in their outlook and personal traits. For
example, they were more likely than other people to describe themselves as <i>weird</i> and <i>crazy</i>. Additionally, they tended to believe in a range of
“alternative” ideas (such as psychokinesis, reincarnation, astrology,
witchcraft, and psychic powers), say that they “respect the power of magic,”
and scored highly in measures of magical thinking, fantasy proneness, and
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/psilocybin-and-personality" target="_blank">absorption</a><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-AU; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">[1]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span>.
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 36.0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiAEMyCZ3zQ_RoD36C9fbO28nTen7tPI8qLgPawS7sDGT-leaELaD27joLUwDRCayG5JVmuKrtSLaJi2XqPKfvC8s-tzjqGkfRoqKpxUqjygCwBzKkvQDt7TDtz8PWdhXbUIr3c1PoaBmg/s1600/unfiltered_anger_by_louisdyer-d5pjsm9.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiAEMyCZ3zQ_RoD36C9fbO28nTen7tPI8qLgPawS7sDGT-leaELaD27joLUwDRCayG5JVmuKrtSLaJi2XqPKfvC8s-tzjqGkfRoqKpxUqjygCwBzKkvQDt7TDtz8PWdhXbUIr3c1PoaBmg/s320/unfiltered_anger_by_louisdyer-d5pjsm9.jpg" height="320" width="241" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 36.0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; text-indent: 36pt;">
<i>"Unfiltered anger" by Louis Dyer</i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; text-indent: 36pt;">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 36.0pt;">
Characteristics such as magical
thinking and so on have been linked to a set of traits known as schizotypy, or
proneness to mildly psychotic thinking. Schizotypy refers to a cluster of
cognitive, emotional, and behavioural traits that are similar to but generally
milder than those exhibited in schizophrenia. It is associated with unusual
beliefs about reality (e.g. that it is possible to harm other by thinking bad
thoughts about them) and the tendency to have odd perceptual experiences (such
as feeling that strangers are reading one’s mind). Other research has found
that "New Age" beliefs and practices (in this study this term encompassed such things as yoga, Reiki, astrology, and Tarot)
are associated with schizotypy (Farias,
Claridge, & Lalljee, 2005). Schizotypy tends to be associated with
high levels of anxiety and depression (Lewandowski
et al., 2006). It could be the case that people with schizotypal
tendencies and associated proneness to anxiety and depression may find
unconventional spiritual ideas to be particularly appealing. It is also
possible (and I admit this is speculation) that adherence to such ideas
exacerbates their existing mental imbalances. (It should be noted though that many
people with schizotypal tendencies are otherwise well-adjusted. Schizotypy has
also been linked to artistic creativity.) <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 36.0pt;">
Whether unconventional spiritual
pursuits are harmful to mental health is not yet known. In some respects, the
association between spirituality and mental disorder seems contrary to the
benefits that many spiritual traditions claim to offer. Spiritual fulfilment is
supposed to lead to inner peace, even bliss. In fact certain mystics have gone
so far as to <a href="http://www.mindmined.com/public_library/nonfiction/anonymous_my_cosmic_trigger_finger_is_broken.html">claim</a>
that spiritual “work” can lead to an inner transformation that will result in
“True wisdom and perfect happiness”! The very idea of “perfect happiness” seems
like an impossible mirage, although a more charitable interpretation is that
the term is intended as a poetic metaphor rather than a literal reality. So why
are so many spiritual people so troubled? It may be that some people are simply
not that successful in pursuing whatever spiritual fulfilment they are seeking.
King et al. (2013) found that those who were spiritual but not religious rated
the strength of their belief and the importance of the practice of their faith
somewhat lower than the religious participants in their study. This might
indicate a lack of dedication or self-discipline on the part of those who claim
to be spiritual but not religious. More detailed studies are needed to
determine if this is the case.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 36.0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiH8y2dN6XdCp7S63ZyleXJekaEhT_EnyXqkxs9tN-Y8EgAimdo7LB-cl8f8EALBht0nqkzqdLyVb-lADU8GKlmBKiz2eorX6k-20DR1rooj-3XsQ8-eZ1efgxz17DfZC1z7d9ia8Vu8zE/s1600/FOUO.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiH8y2dN6XdCp7S63ZyleXJekaEhT_EnyXqkxs9tN-Y8EgAimdo7LB-cl8f8EALBht0nqkzqdLyVb-lADU8GKlmBKiz2eorX6k-20DR1rooj-3XsQ8-eZ1efgxz17DfZC1z7d9ia8Vu8zE/s1600/FOUO.JPG" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 36.0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 36.0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 36.0pt;">
Another limitation of the study
by King et al. was that it did not examine the specific content of the beliefs
and practices of the spiritual but not religious. The content of one’s
spiritual beliefs could well affect one’s mental health. For example, belief in
the interconnectedness of things might be relatively beneficial, whereas more
“superstitious” beliefs such as in the “evil eye” could be harmful to one’s
mental health. Research could examine
whether certain particular spiritual practices are more associated with mental
disorder than others. For example, yoga and meditation are generally thought to
be beneficial to one’s well-being, but more bizarre practices (such as
“regression” to before one’s birth) might encourage a person to hold peculiar
ideas that may not serve them well in real life. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 36.0pt;">
An additional puzzle is why the
three groups in the King et al. study did not differ in their overall happiness
even though one group was more prone to mental disorder. Happiness was assessed
with a single question, whereas mental health status was assessed with a
clinical interview, so a more detailed assessment of well-being might provide a
more nuanced picture. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 36.0pt;">
Considering the increasing
prominence in modern society of people who consider themselves spiritual but
not religious, more in-depth research is needed to understand fully why this
group seems to be particularly vulnerable to mental illness. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 36.0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Follow me on </span></i></b><a href="https://www.facebook.com/UniqueLikeEverybodyElse"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Facebook,</span></i></b></a>
<a href="https://plus.google.com/b/116570783533948602312/116570783533948602312/posts"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Google
Plus</span></i></b></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">, or </span></i></b><a href="https://twitter.com/ScottAMcGreal"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Twitter</span></i></b></a><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">© Scott McGreal. Please do not reproduce without
permission. Brief excerpts may be quoted as long as a link to the original
article is provided. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">This article also appears on Psychology Today on
my blog <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201301/troubled-souls-spirituality-mental-health-hazard">Unique
- Like Everybody Else</a>. Check out my latest articles!<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Other blog posts related
to spirituality<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/psilocybin-and-personality">Psilocybin
and personality</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/psilocybin-and-brain-function">Psilocybin
and brain function</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/psilocybin-anxiety-and-depression-in-cancer">Psilocybin
for anxiety and depression in cancer</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/dmt-aliens-and-reality-part-1">DMT,
aliens and reality – part 1</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/dmt-aliens-and-reality-part-2">DMT,
aliens and reality – part 2</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/precognition-and-the-search-the-soul-part-1">Precognition
and the search for the soul – part 1</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201210/precognition-and-the-search-the-soul-part-2">Precognition
and the search for the soul – part 2</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-outline-level: 1;">
<a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201212/the-spirituality-psychedelic-drug-users">The Spirituality of Psychedelic Drug Users</a><br />
<br />
<span style="float: left; padding: 5px;"><a href="http://www.researchblogging.org/"><img alt="ResearchBlogging.org" src="http://www.researchblogging.org/public/citation_icons/rb2_large_gray.png" style="border: 0;" /></a></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 36.0pt;">
<b>References <o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 72.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
Farias, M., Claridge, G., & Lalljee, M. (2005).
Personality and cognitive predictors of New Age practices and beliefs. <i>Personality and Individual Differences, 39</i>(5),
979-989. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2005.04.003<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 72.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
<br />
<span class="Z3988" title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.jtitle=The+British+Journal+of+Psychiatry&rft_id=info%3Adoi%2F10.1192%2Fbjp.bp.112.112003&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fresearchblogging.org&rft.atitle=Religion%2C+spirituality+and+mental+health%3A+results+from+a+national+study+of+English+households&rft.issn=0007-1250&rft.date=2012&rft.volume=202&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=68&rft.epage=73&rft.artnum=http%3A%2F%2Fbjp.rcpsych.org%2Fcgi%2Fdoi%2F10.1192%2Fbjp.bp.112.112003&rft.au=King%2C+M.&rft.au=Marston%2C+L.&rft.au=McManus%2C+S.&rft.au=Brugha%2C+T.&rft.au=Meltzer%2C+H.&rft.au=Bebbington%2C+P.&rfe_dat=bpr3.included=1;bpr3.tags=Psychology%2CPersonality%2C+Religion%2C+Spirituality%2C+Psychopathology">King, M., Marston, L., McManus, S., Brugha, T., Meltzer, H., & Bebbington, P. (2012). Religion, spirituality and mental health: results from a national study of English households <span style="font-style: italic;">The British Journal of Psychiatry, 202</span> (1), 68-73 DOI: <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.112.112003" rev="review">10.1192/bjp.bp.112.112003</a></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 72.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
<br />
King, M., Weich, S., Nazroo, J., & Blizard, B.
(2006). Religion, mental health and ethnicity. EMPIRIC – A national
survey of England. <i>Journal of Mental
Health, 15</i>(2), 153-162. doi: doi:10.1080/09638230600608891<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 72.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
<br />
Koenig, H. G. (2008). Concerns About Measuring
"Spirituality" in Research. <i>The
Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 196</i>(5), 349-355
310.1097/NMD.1090b1013e31816ff31796. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 72.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
<br />
Lewandowski, K. E., Barrantes-Vidal, N., Nelson-Gray,
R. O., Clancy, C., Kepley, H. O., & Kwapil, T. R. (2006). Anxiety and
depression symptoms in psychometrically identified schizotypy. <i>Schizophrenia Research, 83</i>(2–3),
225-235. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2005.11.024<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 72.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
<br />
Lindeman, M., & Aarnio, K. (2007). Superstitious,
magical, and paranormal beliefs: An integrative model. <i>Journal of Research in Personality, 41</i>(4), 731-744. doi:
10.1016/j.jrp.2006.06.009<br />
<span style="text-indent: -36pt;"><br /></span>
<span style="text-indent: -36pt;">Saucier, G., & Skrzypińska,
K. (2006). Spiritual But Not Religious? Evidence for Two Independent
Dispositions. </span><i style="text-indent: -36pt;">Journal of Personality, 74</i><span style="text-indent: -36pt;">(5),
1257-1292. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2006.00409.x</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 36.0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div>
<!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><br clear="all" />
<hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" />
<!--[endif]-->
<br />
<div id="ftn1">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-AU; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">[1]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span> I
discuss absorption and its relationship to mystical experiences occasioned by
psychedelic drugs in a previous <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201209/psilocybin-and-personality">post</a>.<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
</div>
Scott McGrealhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13757633582829269183noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2304269645366413372.post-38868810080030054302013-03-30T21:19:00.002+11:002019-08-23T20:26:43.946+10:00What are Porn Stars' Personalities Like? <br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<i>What recent research might suggest about porn stars’ personality traits<o:p></o:p></i><br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As noted in a previous <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201212/porn-stars-and-evolutionary-psychology">post</a>,
a number of recent studies have provided a glimpse into the usually secretive
world of pornography actors and actresses. Compared to matched community
control groups, both male and female performers reported higher self-esteem,
earlier age of first sexual experience, greater enjoyment of sex, and a far
greater number of sex partners. Note that this latter finding referred only to
sex partners outside their work in pornography. Additionally, the study on
females reported that actresses described themselves as more “spiritual” than
women in the control group. None of these studies reported directly on the
personality traits of porn performers, but it is possible to speculate about
this based on what is known about how personality is related to the factors mentioned.
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKk5ceUZPfl-P1X_vnsqYMrBkx_mhoTfyLe60jhka5weJff66LEtPcSApAM3RaTfbH8GffJp46XdZ9onhXhL3p39UFTxvZ96x7397JrJhsyLN7FRAQzdhiW_Gh4ikqrFmEUbIgn4X2P3M/s1600/Jesse_Jane_2010.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKk5ceUZPfl-P1X_vnsqYMrBkx_mhoTfyLe60jhka5weJff66LEtPcSApAM3RaTfbH8GffJp46XdZ9onhXhL3p39UFTxvZ96x7397JrJhsyLN7FRAQzdhiW_Gh4ikqrFmEUbIgn4X2P3M/s320/Jesse_Jane_2010.jpg" width="213" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Jesse Jane <a href="http://www.xrentdvd.com/Porn_Star_Interviews/Jesse_Jane.html"><span style="color: red;">states </span></a>"I've always been an extremely sexual person and I knew I would like to do videos." </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; line-height: 11px;">© Gle</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; line-height: 11px;">nn Francis,</span><a class="ext" href="http://www.pacificprodigital.com/" rel="nofollow" style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Arial, helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 11px;" target="_blank" title="www.PacificProDigital.com">www.PacificProDigital.com</a> </span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
In my previous article, I argued that porn stars are
probably high in a characteristic known as sociosexuality. Sociosexuality
refers to a person’s willingness to engage in sexual relations outside of a
committed relationship and their interest in having a variety of sexual
partners. This argument was based on the fact that both male (Griffith, Mitchell, Hammond, Gu, & Hart, 2012)
and female performers (Griffith, Mitchell, Hart,
Adams, & Gu, 2012) reported very high numbers of sex partners in
their private lives, separately from their film work, as well as very high
ratings of enjoyment of sex itself. A number of research studies have looked at
how sociosexuality and sexual promiscuity are related to personality traits. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
People of both sexes who are high in interpersonal <a href="http://www.scienceofrelationships.com/home/2011/5/2/the-promiscuous-personality.html">dominance</a>,
that is, those who are socially bold and assertive, tend to have many sexual
partners compared to those who are more submissive (Markey & Markey, 2007). Dominant individuals do not seem to be
shy about seeking out sexual partners, whereas submissive people may wait for
others to seek them out. A number of studies have also linked high
sociosexuality and having a large number of sexual partners to certain
antisocial traits in both men and women. For example, people high in
sociosexuality tend to rate themselves lower in the traits of honesty,
humility, and <a href="http://www.123test.com/personality-agreeableness/">agreeableness</a>
(Bourdage, Lee, Ashton, & Perry, 2007).
Additionally, sociosexuality has also been linked to a group of traits known
collectively as the “dark triad”, namely psychopathy, Machiavellianism, and
narcissism (Jonason, Li, Webster, & Schmitt,
2009). Briefly, psychopathy refers to willingness to violate the rights
of others, Machiavellianism to willingness to manipulate and use others, and
narcissism to an inflated sense of one’s own importance and superiority. These
antisocial traits might be linked to sociosexuality because people high in
these traits might have a selfish attitude towards sex combined with a
willingness to deceive, flatter, and cajole others into having sexual
relations. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The findings discussed so far, if applicable to porn stars
would seem to imply a rather unflattering portrait of these individuals as cold
and antisocial in nature. However, other research suggests that there may be
another, more pleasant face that could also apply. A <a href="http://www.scienceofrelationships.com/home/2011/5/2/the-promiscuous-personality.html">study</a>
on interpersonal styles suggests that individuals who are either very high or
very low in the trait of interpersonal warmth tend have more sexual partners
than people of average warmth (Markey &
Markey, 2007). That is, sexually promiscuous people tend to be either
very warm or very cold in the way they relate to other people. The authors of
this study argued that sexual promiscuity could have different personal
meanings depending on how warm or cold a person is. Cold individuals may see
sex as a selfish act in which they have little regard for their partners’
feelings. They may have multiple sexual partners as a way of avoiding
commitment, perhaps out of fear of mistreatment or rejection. Warm individuals
may have a more caring view of sexual interaction and actually desire to share
love, intimacy and pleasure with many different people. This raises the
possibility that porn stars also might fall (more or less) into two
interpersonal types: warm and cold. Coldness is associated with the dark triad,
so the selfish antisocial personality traits associated with sociosexuality
might be more characteristic of cold rather than warm performers. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Other research has found that people who have more sexual
partners also tend to have higher self-esteem, especially if they are men (Walsh, 1991). This may be because sexual
advances involve a risk of rejection and therefore self-confidence is required
to make them. Also, having sex with someone may affirm one’s sense of attractiveness
and be a source of pride. In regard to
male porn stars, it has been argued that actors might regard their ability to
perform sexually on cue as of particular source importance. In regard to female
actresses, the researchers point out that having a highly positive image of
oneself and one’s body would be very helpful to someone expected to undress on
camera. Additionally, the authors consider that porn stars may well have a
streak of exhibitionism and that their work allows them to freely express this
aspect of their personality and be praised for doing so. Perhaps these factors
might explain why porn stars of both sexes report high self-esteem than other
people. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgE8TPPiNaeHEDXk8Iw6vW2y9Tznr2IObIHTVVWM570hKNRajUuSii8g2HHdZKquu-OOcgqhItEA4DSwduaz5TaH9mLvGy417NYgh_3ROkKtLHVgGIpdXQIGS5oiovLwvPIAV2W0O2fC2o/s1600/Digital_Playground_Girls_2012.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="256" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgE8TPPiNaeHEDXk8Iw6vW2y9Tznr2IObIHTVVWM570hKNRajUuSii8g2HHdZKquu-OOcgqhItEA4DSwduaz5TaH9mLvGy417NYgh_3ROkKtLHVgGIpdXQIGS5oiovLwvPIAV2W0O2fC2o/s320/Digital_Playground_Girls_2012.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: 10px; line-height: 11px;">Notable porn stars: Riley Steele, Stoya, BiBi Jones, Kayden Kross, and Jesse Jane </span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: 10px; line-height: 11px;">© Glenn Francis, </span><a class="ext" href="http://www.pacificprodigital.com/" rel="nofollow" style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 10px; line-height: 11px;" target="_blank" title="www.PacificProDigital.com">www.PacificProDigital.com</a></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Although self-esteem is generally consider an important
marker of psychological health and well-being, the study’s authors’ point out
that in some people self-esteem can be a marker of less desirable
characteristics, such as narcissism and Machiavellianism (members of the “dark
triad” mentioned earlier). Other research has found that there are different
types of self-esteem. Stable self-esteem, based on liking of one’s personal
attributes appears to be healthier than unstable self-esteem, based on pride in
one’s accomplishments (Kernis, Cornell, Sun,
Berry, & Harlow, 1993). The former seems to reflect a healthy
self-regard that allows one to weather setbacks. The latter is easily
threatened by personal failures and leads to defensiveness in response to
negative feedback as well as general arrogance. Future research could help
clarify if the self-esteem of porn stars tends to be mostly stable or
unstable. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-layout-grid-align: none; text-autospace: none;">
Another finding that could be clarified is that from
the study on female performers regarding their greater “spirituality” than
women in the general community. (For some reason, the study on males did not
appear to assess this at all.) The term spirituality is frequently used in
mental health literature, quite often without being clearly defined. This can
lead to confusion about what exactly is meant by the term, resulting in rather amusing
headlines around the internet proclaiming “<a href="http://houston.cbslocal.com/2012/11/26/study-porn-actresses-more-religious-have-higher-self-esteem-than-other-women/">Porn
stars more religious than other women</a>.” To a casual reader this might give
the impression that when not making erotic films, female porn stars are
devoutly attending church and praying, an idea that seem more than a little
incongruous with their public image. However, the actual measure of
spirituality <span style="vertical-align: super;">[1]</span> used in the study asks very generic questions intended to refer to “religion,
spirituality, and any other personal beliefs you may hold.” Example questions
include:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-layout-grid-align: none; text-autospace: none;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-layout-grid-align: none; text-autospace: none;">
“To what extent do you feel your life to be
meaningful?” and “To what extent do your personal beliefs give you the strength
to face difficulties?” <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-layout-grid-align: none; text-autospace: none;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-layout-grid-align: none; text-autospace: none;">
None of the questions refer to belief in God or a
higher power, or to participation in traditional religious or even “spiritual”
activities such as prayer or meditation. Although the questions could be
interpreted very loosely as “spiritual”, it would seem more accurate to
consider these questions as referring to one’s ability to cope with and
understand life difficulties and to experience personal meaning. A better
interpretation might be something like “self-efficacy” or perhaps “resilience”
than “spirituality” which is easily misunderstood. The study finding might
suggest that female porn stars consider they have personal beliefs (whatever
they may be) that give them an edge over other women in coping with difficult life
events. Perhaps working in the adult film industry requires particular mental
toughness to thrive compared to more mundane roles. However, the study does not
speak to what porn stars actually believe and so does not address whether or
not they differ from other women in terms of any specifically religious or
particularly “spiritual” beliefs as these terms are usually understood. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-layout-grid-align: none; text-autospace: none;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-layout-grid-align: none; text-autospace: none;">
The ideas in this article are necessarily
speculative. Only further research can determine whether porn star tend to fall
into either a warm, friendly type or a cold, selfish type with dark triad
traits. It might even be the case that these personality traits are not
particularly relevant at to this population at all, as they might simply be
people with very permissive sexual attitudes and very positive views of
themselves. Further research is also needed to examine what self-esteem and
“spirituality” really mean for porn stars so as to better understand why they
are higher in these things than other people. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-layout-grid-align: none; text-autospace: none;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-layout-grid-align: none; text-autospace: none;">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<b><i>Note<o:p></o:p></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 10pt;">[1]</span></span></span> The World Health Organization Quality of Life <a href="http://www.who.int/mental_health/media/68.pdf">instrument</a>, spirituality facet.</div>
<div>
</div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-layout-grid-align: none; text-autospace: none;">
<o:p><span style="color: blue;"><b>This post has previously appeared on Psychology Today in my blog <i><a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201301/the-personalities-porn-stars">Unique - Like Everybody Else</a></i></b></span></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "arial" , "sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></i></b><b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "arial" , "sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">Related Reading:</span></i></b><br />
<b><span style="background-color: white; color: red; font-family: "arial" , "sans-serif"; font-size: 10pt;"><a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201212/porn-stars-and-evolutionary-psychology" target="_blank">Porn Stars and Evolutionary Psychology</a></span></b><br />
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "arial" , "sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></i></b>
<o:p></o:p><br />
<b><i><span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: "arial" , "sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: red; font-family: "arial" , "sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt;">© Scott McGreal. Please do not reproduce without
permission. Brief excerpts may be quoted as long as a link to the original
article is provided. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-layout-grid-align: none; text-autospace: none;">
<b>References</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; mso-layout-grid-align: none; text-autospace: none;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
Bourdage, J. S., Lee, K., Ashton, M. C., & Perry,
A. (2007). Big Five and HEXACO model personality correlates of sexuality. <i>Personality and Individual Differences, 43</i>(6),
1506-1516. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2007.04.008<o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
<span class="Z3988" title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.jtitle=International+Journal+of+Sexual+Health&rft_id=info%3Adoi%2F10.1080%2F19317611.2012.710183&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fresearchblogging.org&rft.atitle=A+Comparison+of+Sexual+Behaviors+and+Attitudes%2C+Self-Esteem%2C+Quality+of+Life%2C+and+Drug+Use+Among+Pornography+Actors+and+a+Matched+Sample&rft.issn=1931-7611&rft.date=2012&rft.volume=24&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=254&rft.epage=266&rft.artnum=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tandfonline.com%2Fdoi%2Fabs%2F10.1080%2F19317611.2012.710183&rft.au=Griffith%2C+J.&rft.au=Mitchell%2C+S.&rft.au=Hammond%2C+B.&rft.au=Gu%2C+L.&rft.au=Hart%2C+C.&rfe_dat=bpr3.included=1;bpr3.tags=Psychology%2CPersonality%2C+Pornography%2C+Sociosexuality">Griffith, J., Mitchell, S., Hammond, B., Gu, L., & Hart, C. (2012). A Comparison of Sexual Behaviors and Attitudes, Self-Esteem, Quality of Life, and Drug Use Among Pornography Actors and a Matched Sample <span style="font-style: italic;">International Journal of Sexual Health, 24</span> (4), 254-266 DOI: <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19317611.2012.710183" rev="review">10.1080/19317611.2012.710183</a></span><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
<span class="Z3988" title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+Sex+Research&rft_id=info%3Adoi%2F10.1080%2F00224499.2012.719168&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fresearchblogging.org&rft.atitle=Pornography+Actresses%3A+An+Assessment+of+the+Damaged+Goods+Hypothesis&rft.issn=0022-4499&rft.date=2012&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=12&rft.artnum=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tandfonline.com%2Fdoi%2Fabs%2F10.1080%2F00224499.2012.719168&rft.au=Griffith%2C+J.&rft.au=Mitchell%2C+S.&rft.au=Hart%2C+C.&rft.au=Adams%2C+L.&rft.au=Gu%2C+L.&rfe_dat=bpr3.included=1;bpr3.tags=Psychology%2CPersonality">Griffith, J., Mitchell, S., Hart, C., Adams, L., & Gu, L. (2012). Pornography Actresses: An Assessment of the Damaged Goods Hypothesis <span style="font-style: italic;">Journal of Sex Research</span>, 1-12 DOI: <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2012.719168" rev="review">10.1080/00224499.2012.719168</a></span><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
Jonason, P. K., Li, N. P., Webster, G. D., &
Schmitt, D. P. (2009). The dark triad: Facilitating a short-term mating
strategy in men. <i>European Journal of
Personality, 23</i>(1), 5-18. doi: 10.1002/per.698<o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
Kernis, M. H., Cornell, D. P., Sun, C.-R., Berry, A.,
& Harlow, T. (1993). There's More to Self-Esteem Than Whether It Is High or
Low: The Importance of Stability of Self-Esteem. <i>Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65</i>(6), 1190-1204. <o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
Markey, P. M., & Markey, C. N. (2007). The
interpersonal meaning of sexual promiscuity. <i>Journal of Research in Personality, 41</i>(6), 1199-1212. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2007.02.004<o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 36.0pt; text-indent: -36.0pt;">
Walsh, A. (1991). Self-esteem
and sexual behavior: Exploring gender differences. <i>Sex Roles, 25</i>(7-8), 441-450. doi: 10.1007/bf00292533<o:p></o:p></div>
<div>
<!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><br clear="all" />
<hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" />
<!--[endif]-->
<br />
<div id="ftn1">
<br /></div>
</div>
Scott McGrealhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13757633582829269183noreply@blogger.com0