nach oben

Social Justice Research

Erschienen in:

27.10.2017

Who Can Deviate from the Party Line? Political Ideology Moderates Evaluation of Incongruent Policy Positions in Insula and Anterior Cingulate Cortex

verfasst von: Ingrid Johnsen Haas, Melissa N. Baker, Frank J. Gonzalez

Erschienen in: Social Justice Research | Ausgabe 4/2017

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Political polarization at the elite level is a major concern in many contemporary democracies, which is argued to alienate large swaths of the electorate and prevent meaningful social change from occurring, yet little is known about how individuals respond to political candidates who deviate from the party line and express policy positions incongruent with their party affiliations. This experiment examines the neural underpinnings of such evaluations using functional MRI (fMRI). During fMRI, participants completed an experimental task where they evaluated policy positions attributed to hypothetical political candidates. Each block of trials focused on one candidate (Democrat or Republican), but all participants saw two candidates from each party in a randomized order. On each trial, participants received information about whether the candidate supported or opposed a specific policy issue. These issue positions varied in terms of congruence between issue position and candidate party affiliation. We modeled neural activity as a function of incongruence and whether participants were viewing ingroup or outgroup party candidates. Results suggest that neural activity in brain regions previously implicated in both evaluative processing and work on ideological differences (insula and anterior cingulate cortex) differed as a function of the interaction between incongruence, candidate type (ingroup versus outgroup), and political ideology. More liberal participants showed greater activation to incongruent versus congruent trials in insula and ACC, primarily when viewing ingroup candidates. Implications for the study of democratic representation and linkages between citizens’ calls for social change and policy implementation are discussed.

Vorheriger Artikel Putting Ourselves in Another’s Skin: Using the Plasticity of Self-Perception to Enhance Empathy and Decrease Prejudice

Nächster Artikel The Role of Genes and Environments in Linking the Need to Evaluate with Political Ideology and Political Extremity

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

We also varied task uncertainty but that is beyond the scope of the present manuscript and will not be discussed here.

The candidates themselves were not the primary focus of this experiment, so this choice was made to minimize potential variability in candidate evaluation as a function of gender or race. Six candidate images were chosen from the Chicago Face Database (Ma, Correll, & Wittenbrink, 2015), based on gender, race, and perceived age. Four images were randomly selected for each participant and shown in randomized order.

Participants also completed a number of individual difference measures after scanning, but these are beyond the scope of the current manuscript and will not be discussed in more detail here.

No option for “moderate” was offered in order to ensure we could discriminate between candidates that would be most likely seen as “ingroup” and “outgroup” candidates. Further, partisan “leaners” and even Independents have been shown to largely manifest the same-party-based evaluations as partisan identifiers and tend to show meaningful implicit preferences (Hawkins & Nosek, 2012; Iyengar & Westwood, 2015; Keith et al., 1986; Lundberg & Payne, 2014).

Ahn, W.-Y., Kishida, Kenneth T., Gu, X., Lohrenz, T., Harvey, A., Alford, John R., et al. (2014). Nonpolitical images evoke neural predictors of political ideology. Current Biology, 24, 1–7. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2014.09.050.CrossRef

Amodio, D. M., Jost, J. T., Master, S. L., & Yee, C. M. (2007). Neurocognitive correlates of liberalism and conservatism. Nature Neuroscience, 10, 1246–1247.CrossRefPubMed

Arceneaux, K. (2008). Do partisan cues diminish democratic accountability? Political Behavior, 30(2), 139–160.CrossRef

Atieh, J. M., Brief, A. P., & Vollrath, D. A. (1987). The Protestant work ethic-conservatism paradox: Beliefs and values in work and life. Personality and Individual Differences, 8(4), 577–580.CrossRef

Binder, S. A. (2003). Stalemate: Causes and consequences of legislative gridlock. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

Botvinick, M. M. (2007). Conflict monitoring and decision making: Reconciling two perspectives on anterior cingulate function. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 7(4), 356–366.CrossRef

Burock, M. A., Buckner, R. L., Woldorff, M. G., Rosen, B. R., & Dale, A. M. (1998). Randomized event-related experimental designs allow for extremely rapid presentation rates using functional MRI. NeuroReport, 9(16), 3735–3739.CrossRefPubMed

Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 116–131.CrossRef

Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Feinstein, J. A., & Jarvis, W. B. G. (1996). Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 197–253.CrossRef

Carter, C. S., Braver, T. S., Barch, D. M., Botvinick, M. M., Noll, D., & Cohen, J. D. (1998). Anterior cingulate cortex, error detection, and the online monitoring of performance. Science, 280, 747–749.CrossRefPubMed

Chirumbolo, A., Areni, A., & Sensales, G. (2004). Need for cognitive closure and politics: Voting, political attitudes, and attributional style. International Journal of Psychology, 39(4), 245–253.CrossRef

Cloutier, J., Gabrieli, J. D., O’Young, D., & Ambady, N. (2011). An fMRI study of violations of social expectations: When people are not who we expect them to be. NeuroImage, 57(2), 583–588. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.04.051.CrossRefPubMed

Cohen, G. L. (2003). Party over policy: The dominating impact of group influence on political beliefs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 808–822.CrossRefPubMed

Cunningham, W. A., Haas, I. J., & Jahn, A. (2011). Attitudes. In J. Decety & J. T. Cacioppo (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of social neuroscience (pp. 212–226). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Cunningham, W. A., Johnson, M. K., Gatenby, J. C., Gore, J. C., & Banaji, M. R. (2003). Neural components of social evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 639–649.CrossRefPubMed

Cunningham, W. A., Van Bavel, J. J., & Johnsen, I. R. (2008). Affective flexibility: Evaluative processing goals shape amygdala activity. Psychological Science, 19, 152–160. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02061.x.CrossRefPubMed

Cunningham, W. A., & Zelazo, P. D. (2007). Attitudes and evaluations: A social cognitive neuroscience perspective. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11, 97–104.CrossRefPubMed

Cunningham, W. A., Zelazo, P. D., Packer, D. J., & Van Bavel, J. J. (2007). The iterative reprocessing model: A multilevel framework for attitudes and evaluation. Social Cognition, 25, 736–760.CrossRef

Dale, A. M., Greve, D. N., & Burock, M. A. (1999). Optimal stimulus sequences for event-related fMRI. NeuroImage, 9, S33–S33.CrossRef

Dalton, R. J. (2008). The quantity and the quality of party systems party system polarization, its measurement, and its consequences. Comparative Political Studies, 41(7), 899–920.CrossRef

Dancey, L., & Sheagley, G. (2013). Heuristics behaving badly: Party cues and voter knowledge. American Journal of Political Science, 57(2), 312–325.CrossRef

Edwards, G. C., III, Barrett, A., & Peake, J. (1997). The legislative impact of divided government. American Journal of Political Science, 41(2), 545–563.CrossRef

Fay, D., & Frese, M. (2000). Conservatives’ approach to work: Less prepared for future work demands? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30(1), 171–195.CrossRef

Fazio, R. H. (2007). Attitudes as object-evaluation associations of varying strength. Social Cognition, 25, 603–637.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Gillies, J., & Campbell, S. (1985). Conservatism and poetry preferences. British Journal of Social Psychology, 24(3), 223–227.CrossRef

Golec, A., & Federico, C. M. (2004). Understanding responses to political conflict: Interactive effects of the need for closure and salient conflict schemas. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 750–762.CrossRefPubMed

Green, D., Palmquist, B., & Schickler, E. (2002). Partisan hearts and minds. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Greene, S. (1999). Understanding party identification: A social identity approach. Political Psychology, 20(2), 393–403.CrossRef

Gu, X., Liu, X., Van Dam, N. T., Hof, P. R., & Fan, J. (2013). Cognition–emotion integration in the anterior insular cortex. Cerebral Cortex, 23(1), 20–27. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhr367.CrossRefPubMed

Haas, I. J. (2016). The impact of uncertainty, threat, and political identity on support for political compromise. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 38(3), 137–152.CrossRef

Hare, C., & Poole, K. T. (2014). The polarization of contemporary American politics. Polity, 46(3), 411–429.CrossRef

Hawkins, C. B., & Nosek, B. A. (2012). Motivated independence? Implicit party identity predicts political judgments among self-proclaimed independents. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(11), 1437–1452. doi:10.1177/0146167212452313.CrossRefPubMed

Hehman, E., Ingbretsen, Z. A., & Freeman, J. B. (2014). The neural basis of stereotypic impact on multiple social categorization. NeuroImage, 101, 704–711. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.07.056.CrossRefPubMed

Hibbing, J. R., & Theiss-Morse, E. (2002). Stealth democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Hilton, J. L., & von Hippel, W. (1996). Stereotypes. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 237–271.CrossRefPubMed

Huddy, L., Mason, L., & Aarøe, L. (2015). Expressive partisanship: Campaign involvement, political emotion, and partisan identity. American Political Science Review, 109(01), 1–17. doi:10.1017/s0003055414000604.CrossRef

Iyengar, S., & Westwood, S. J. (2015). Fear and loathing across party lines: New evidence on group polarization. American Journal of Political Science, 59(3), 690–707. doi:10.1111/ajps.12152.CrossRef

Jenkinson, M., Bannister, P., Brady, M., & Smith, S. (2002). Improved optimisation for the robust and accurate linear registration and motion correction of brain images. NeuroImage, 17, 825–841.CrossRefPubMed

Jenkinson, M., Beckmann, C. F., Behrens, T. E., Woolrich, M. W., & Smith, S. M. (2012). FSL. NeuroImage, 62, 782–790.CrossRefPubMed

Jennings, M. K. (1992). Ideological thinking among mass publics and political elites. Public Opinion Quarterly, 56(4), 419–441.CrossRef

Jones, J. M. (2014). Americans continue to say a third political party is needed. Gallup. http://www.gallup.com/poll/177284/americans-continue-say-third-political-party-needed.aspx.

Jost, J. T., & Amodio, D. M. (2012). Political ideology as motivated social cognition: Behavioral and neuroscientific evidence. Motivation and Emotion, 36(1), 55–64. doi:10.1007/s11031-011-9260-7.CrossRef

Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. J. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 339–375.CrossRefPubMed

Jost, J. T., Napier, J. L., Thorisdottir, H., Gosling, S. D., Palfai, T. P., & Ostafin, B. (2007). Are needs to manage uncertainty and threat associated with political conservatism or ideological extremity? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 989–1007.CrossRefPubMed

Kanai, R., Feilden, T., Firth, C., & Rees, G. (2011). Political orientations are correlated with brain structure in young adults. Current Biology, 21(8), 677–680. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2011.03.017.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Kaplan, J. T., Freedman, J., & Iacoboni, M. (2007). Us versus them: Political attitudes and party affiliation influence neural responses to faces of presidential candidates. Neuropsychologia, 45, 55–64.CrossRefPubMed

Keith, B. E., Magleby, D. B., Nelson, C. J., Orr, E., Westlye, M. C., & Wolfinger, R. E. (1986). The partisan affinities of independent ‘leaners’. British Journal of Political Science, 16(2), 155–185.CrossRef

Kemmelmeier, M. (2007). Political conservatism, rigidity, and dogmatism in American foreign policy officials: The 1966 Mennis data. Journal of Psychology, 141(1), 77–90.CrossRefPubMed

Kolling, N., Behrens, T., Wittmann, M. K., & Rushworth, M. (2016). Multiple signals in anterior cingulate cortex. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 37, 36–43. doi:10.1016/j.conb.2015.12.007.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Lau, R. R., & Redlawsk, D. P. (2001). Advantages and disadvantages of cognitive heuristics in political decision making. American Journal of Political Science, 45, 951–971.CrossRef

Leone, L., & Chirumbolo, A. (2008). Conservatism as motivated avoidance of affect: Need for affect scales predict conservatism measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 42(3), 755–762.CrossRef

Lundberg, K. B., & Payne, B. K. (2014). Decisions among the undecided: Implicit attitudes predict future voting behavior of undecided voters. PLoS ONE, 9(1), e85680. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0085680.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Ma, D. S., Correll, J., & Wittenbrink, B. (2015). The Chicago face database: A free stimulus set of faces and norming data. Behavior Research Methods, 47(4), 1122–1135. doi:10.3758/s13428-014-0532-5.CrossRefPubMed

Malhotra, N., & Kuo, A. G. (2008). Attributing blame: The public’s response to Hurricane Katrina. The Journal of Politics, 70(1), 120–135.CrossRef

Masket, S. (2009). No middle ground: How informal party organizations control nominations and polarize legislatures. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.CrossRef

McCarty, N., Poole, K. T., & Rosenthal, H. (2006). Polarized America: The dance of political ideology and unequal riches. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Medford, N., & Critchley, H. D. (2010). Conjoint activity of anterior insular and anterior cingulate cortex: Awareness and response. Brain Structure and Function, 214(5–6), 535–549. doi:10.1007/s00429-010-0265-x.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Mitchell, J. P., Macrae, C. N., & Banaji, M. R. (2006). Dissociable medial prefrontal contributions to judgments of similar and dissimilar others. Neuron, 50, 655–663.CrossRefPubMed

Mondak, J. J. (2010). Personality and the foundations of political behavior. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Mondak, J., & Mitchell, D.-G. (2008). Fault lines: Why the Republicans lost Congress. New York, NY: Routledge.

Nam, H. H., Jost, J. T., & Van Bavel, J. J. (2013). “Not for all the tea in China!” Political ideology and the avoidance of dissonance-arousing situations. PLoS ONE, 8(4), e59837. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0059837.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Nicholson, S. P. (2011). Dominating cues and the limits of elite influence. The Journal of Politics, 73(4), 1165–1177.CrossRef

Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change (Vol. 19, pp. 123–205). New York: Academic Press.

Pew Research Center. (2015). Beyond distrust: How Americans view their government. http://www.people-press.org/2015/11/23/beyond-distrust-how-americans-view-their-government/.

Psychology Software Tools Inc. (2012). E-Prime 2.0. Retrieved from http://www.pstnet.com.

Rahn, W. M. (1993). The role of partisan stereotypes in information processing about political candidates. American Journal of Political Science, 37, 472–496.CrossRef

Schreiber, D., Fonzo, G., Simmons, A. N., Dawes, C. T., Flagan, T., Fowler, J. H., et al. (2013). Red brain, blue brain: Evaluative processes differ in Democrats and Republicans. PLoS ONE, 8(2), e52970. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0052970.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Sinclair, B. (2006). Party wars. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.

Smith, S. M. (2002). Fast robust automated brain extraction. Human Brain Mapping, 17, 143–155. doi:10.1002/hbm.10062.CrossRefPubMed

Smith, S. M., Jaenkinson, M., Woolrich, M. W., Beckmann, C. F., Behrens, T. E. J., Johansen-Berg, H., et al. (2004). Advances in functional and structural MR image analysis and implementation as FSL. NeuroImage, 23, S208–S219. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.07.051.CrossRefPubMed

Spezio, M. L., Rangel, A., Alvarez, R. M., O’Doherty, J. P., Mattes, K., Todorov, A., et al. (2008). A neural basis for the effect of candidate appearance on election outcomes. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 3(4), 344–352. doi:10.1093/scan/nsn040.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Theriault, S. M. (2008). Party polarization in congress. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Tusche, A., Kahnt, T., Wisniewski, D., & Haynes, J. D. (2013). Automatic processing of political preferences in the human brain. NeuroImage, 72, 174–182. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.01.020.CrossRefPubMed

Uddin, L. Q. (2015). Salience processing and insular cortical function and dysfunction. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 16(1), 55–61. doi:10.1038/nrn3857.CrossRefPubMed

Westen, D., Blagov, P. S., Harenski, K., Kilts, C., & Hamann, S. (2006). Neural bases of motivated reasoning: An fMRI study of emotional constraints on partisan political judgment in the 2004 U.S. presidential election. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18, 1947–1958.CrossRefPubMed

Worsley, K. J. (2001). Statistical analysis of activation images. In P. Jezzard, P. M. Matthews, & S. M. Smith (Eds.), Functional MRI: An introduction to methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Zavala, D., Golec, A., Cislak, A., & Wesolowska, E. (2010). Political conservatism, need for cognitive closure, and intergroup hostility. Political Psychology, 31(4), 521–541.CrossRef

Titel: Who Can Deviate from the Party Line? Political Ideology Moderates Evaluation of Incongruent Policy Positions in Insula and Anterior Cingulate Cortex
verfasst von: Ingrid Johnsen Haas
Melissa N. Baker
Frank J. Gonzalez
Publikationsdatum: 27.10.2017
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Social Justice Research / Ausgabe 4/2017
Print ISSN: 0885-7466
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-6725
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-017-0295-0

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2017

The Neurobiology of Fairness and Social Justice: An Introduction

Who Sees What as Fair? Mapping Individual Differences in Valuation of Reciprocity, Charity, and Impartiality

The Role of Genes and Environments in Linking the Need to Evaluate with Political Ideology and Political Extremity

Observing Environmental Destruction Stimulates Neural Activation in Networks Associated with Empathic Responses

Putting Ourselves in Another’s Skin: Using the Plasticity of Self-Perception to Enhance Empathy and Decrease Prejudice

A Genetic Basis of Economic Egalitarianism

Premium Partner