September 12

siennaredwoodIA et Robotique

23 févr. 2014 (il y a 3 années et 8 mois)

84 vue(s)


“Repeal… would undermine recruiting and retention, impact
leadership at all levels, have adverse effects on the willingness
of parents who lend their sons and daughters to military service,
and eventually break the All
-
Volunteer Force.”




March 2009 statement signed by
1,167
retired admirals
and
generals


“The flag and general officers for the military, 1,167 to date,
51 of them former four
-
stars, said that this law, if repealed,
could indeed
break
the All
-
Volunteer Force. They chose that
word very carefully. They have a lot of military experience…
and they know what they’re talking about.”




Elaine Donnelly, Center for Military Readiness, May
2010



No overall negative effects on cohesion, recruiting, retention,
harassment, readiness, morale, etc.


“As
positive reports about DADT repeal emerged in the media,
repeal opponents who predicted that open service would
compromise readiness have adjusted their forecasts by
emphasizing the possibility of long
-
term damage that will only
become apparent in the future rather than identifiable
consequences in the short
-
term
.”



A single dimension? (
Hatemi

and colleagues)


Two dimensions? (
Jost

and colleagues)


Three dimensions? (
Inbar

&
Lammers
, 2012)


More than three? (e.g.,
Truett

et al.)


Does the way we conceptualize it affect our results?


How can and should we measure it?


Is there more emphasis on social LC? Why?


Does everyone even fall on this continuum?


Do conceptions vary by culture?


MZ and DZ twins raised together vs. apart


MZ twins vs. DZ twins raised together


MZ twins raised together vs. apart


DZ twins raised together vs. apart


“shared environment”




Additive genetic


Shared environment


Unshared environment


Adding in spouses can get at:


Genotypic
assortative

mating (overestimates environment, underestimates
genetic)


Social homogamy (increases MZ and DZ so no effect)


Social influence (no effect)


What is a heritability coefficient? How do you interpret one?

Tesser, A. (1993). The importance of heritability in psychological research: The case of attitudes.
Psychological Review, 100
(1), 129
-
142.
doi:10.1037/0033
-
295X.100.1.129

© 1993 American Psychological Association

Tesser
, A. (1993). The importance of heritability in psychological research: The case of attitudes.
Psychological Review, 100
(1), 129
-
142.
doi:10.1037/0033
-
295X.100.1.129

© 1993 American Psychological Association


Autoregressive


Structural equation modeling


Best fit





What are the different ways that parents could influence
political ideology of their children?


Hatemi

et al., 2009


How do children’s ideologies change over time?


How do the effects of genetics, shared environment, and unique
environment change over time?


Figure 1


What does this suggest about the effects of parents on
children’s political attitudes?


Effects of genetics and home environment at age 21


Why do the effects of shared environment decrease?


Figures 5 and 6


What does this study tell us about how we get our ideologies?


Any other comments/issues with this study?


What were their samples?


What new approaches did this study add?


What was the sample for this study?


How did they measure political orientation? Table 1


Any other drawbacks of the study?


Figure 4


AI: additive genetic, shared, environmental, social
homogramy
,
social influence


RC: also genotypic
assortative

mating and
nonadditive

genetic
effects


Parents didn’t seem to affect attitudes other than through
genetics


Is this consistent with
Hatemi

et al.?


There was shared environmental influence within twins. How
could this occur?


AI: openness and agreeableness


RC: conscientiousness, extraversion, and openness


Most of relation between personality and orientation is due to
genetics, but not all of the genetic effects are explained by
personality


How could personality influence PO?


What other genetic factors could influence PO?



Ideology serves needs for certainty, security, and solidarity (echoes
of TMT). What motivates liberals?


Ideology comes form orientations toward uncertainty, threat, and
conformity (
Jost

&
Amodio
, 2012). What does that mean for being
conservative vs. liberal? For social class?


What are some of the correlates of liberalism/conservatism they
report?


What effect did 9/11 have on political orientation, according to the
authors? How does that mesh with the findings we talked about last
week on TMT?


Block and Block (2006) nursery school
study
http://
www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0092656605000
632
#



Zamboni et al. 2009

fMRI while read statements.
Conservative statements associated with greater activity in
brain region associated with negative affect, withdraw
motivation


Amodio

et al. 2007

liberals more able to deal with response
conflict (go/no
-
go task) and more ACC activity (conflict area)


“In sum, these results suggest that a more liberal ideology is
associated with stronger motivation to seek out new information
and integrate potentially conflicting pieces of information in
order to arrive at a relatively complex understanding of
reality.” COMMENTS?


Oxley et al., 2008
--
Conservatives more arousal in response to
threat (GSR,
eyeblink
)


Kanai et al., 2011

liberalism and larger ACC; conservatism
and larger amygdala


Genetic polymorphisms predictive of voting behavior, attitudes




So where do ideologies come from? What is the causal order
for these factors?
Can the social environment affect genetics?


Do these genetic findings suggest
that PO is
not rational and
can’t change?


What about moderates?


Proposal due in 2 weeks. Questions?



Next week: How liberals and conservatives differ