IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0026456.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Automatic Conservative: Ideology-Based Attentional Asymmetries in the Processing of Valenced Information

Author

Listed:
  • Luciana Carraro
  • Luigi Castelli
  • Claudia Macchiella

Abstract

Research has widely explored the differences between conservatives and liberals, and it has been also recently demonstrated that conservatives display different reactions toward valenced stimuli. However, previous studies have not yet fully illuminated the cognitive underpinnings of these differences. In the current work, we argued that political ideology is related to selective attention processes, so that negative stimuli are more likely to automatically grab the attention of conservatives as compared to liberals. In Experiment 1, we demonstrated that negative (vs. positive) information impaired the performance of conservatives, more than liberals, in an Emotional Stroop Task. This finding was confirmed in Experiment 2 and in Experiment 3 employing a Dot-Probe Task, demonstrating that threatening stimuli were more likely to attract the attention of conservatives. Overall, results support the conclusion that people embracing conservative views of the world display an automatic selective attention for negative stimuli.

Suggested Citation

  • Luciana Carraro & Luigi Castelli & Claudia Macchiella, 2011. "The Automatic Conservative: Ideology-Based Attentional Asymmetries in the Processing of Valenced Information," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(11), pages 1-6, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0026456
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0026456
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0026456
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0026456&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0026456?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nicholas O Rule & Nalini Ambady, 2010. "Democrats and Republicans Can Be Differentiated from Their Faces," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(1), pages 1-7, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Luciana Carraro & Paolo Negri & Luigi Castelli & Massimiliano Pastore, 2014. "Implicit and Explicit Illusory Correlation as a Function of Political Ideology," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(5), pages 1-6, May.
    2. Haoran Chu & Janet Yang, 2020. "Their Economy and Our Health: Communicating Climate Change to the Divided American Public," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-17, October.
    3. Joanna Sterling & John T. Jost & Gordon Pennycook, 2016. "Are neoliberals more susceptible to bullshit?," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 11(4), pages 352-360, July.
    4. Lorenz Graf-Vlachy & Tarun Goyal & Yannick Ouardi & Andreas König, 2021. "Reviews Left and Right: The Link Between Reviewers’ Political Ideology and Online Review Language," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 63(4), pages 403-417, August.
    5. repec:cup:judgdm:v:11:y:2016:i:4:p:352-360 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Paul G. Lewis, 2019. "Moral Foundations in the 2015-16 U.S. Presidential Primary Debates: The Positive and Negative Moral Vocabulary of Partisan Elites," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-25, August.
    7. Patrick W. Kraft & Milton Lodge & Charles S. Taber, 2015. "Why People “Don’t Trust the Evidenceâ€," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 658(1), pages 121-133, March.
    8. Shona M Tritt & Michael Inzlicht & Jordan B Peterson, 2013. "Preliminary Support for a Generalized Arousal Model of Political Conservatism," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(12), pages 1-10, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Berggren, Niclas & Jordahl, Henrik & Poutvaara, Panu, 2017. "The right look: Conservative politicians look better and voters reward it," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 79-86.
    2. Potrafke, Niklas & Rösch, Marcus & Ursprung, Heinrich, 2020. "Election systems, the “beauty premium” in politics, and the beauty of dissent," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    3. Carmelo Licata & Pierre-Guillaume Méon, 2016. "Partisan stereotypes," Working Papers CEB 16-037, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    4. Kelman, Steven & Hong, Sounman, 2012. ""Hard," "Soft," or "Tough Love": What Kinds of Organizational Culture Promote Successful Performance in Cross-Organizational Collaborations?," Working Paper Series rwp12-005, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    5. Luciana Carraro & Paolo Negri & Luigi Castelli & Massimiliano Pastore, 2014. "Implicit and Explicit Illusory Correlation as a Function of Political Ideology," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(5), pages 1-6, May.
    6. Kelman, Steven J. & Hong, Sounman, 2012. "Hard, Soft, or Tough Love: What Kinds of Organizational Culture Promote Successful Performance in Cross-Organizational Collaborations?," Scholarly Articles 8506868, Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
    7. Poutvaara, Panu & Graefe, Andreas, 2022. "Do Americans Favor Female or Male Politicians? Evidence from Experimental Elections," VfS Annual Conference 2022 (Basel): Big Data in Economics 264117, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0026456. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.