Quote:Turns out liberals are the real authoritarians.

A political-science journal that published an oft-cited study claiming conservatives were more likely to show traits associated with “psychoticism” now says it got it wrong. Very wrong.

The American Journal of Political Science published a correction this year saying that the 2012 paper has “an error” — and that liberal political beliefs, not conservative ones, are actually linked to psychoticism.

“The interpretation of the coding of the political attitude items in the descriptive and preliminary analyses portion of the manuscript was exactly reversed,” the journal said in the startling correction.

“The descriptive analyses report that those higher in Eysenck’s psychoticism are more conservative, but they are actually more liberal; and where the original manuscript reports those higher in neuroticism and social desirability are more liberal, they are, in fact, more conservative.”

In the paper, psychoticism is associated with traits such as tough-mindedness, risk-taking, sensation-seeking, impulsivity and authoritarianism.

The social-desirability scale measures people’s tendency to answer questions in ways they believe would please researchers, even if it means overestimating their positive characteristics and underestimating negative ones.

The erroneous report has been cited 45 times, according to Thomson Reuters Web of Science.

Brad Verhulst, a Virginia Commonwealth University researcher and a co-author of the paper, said he was not sure who was to blame.

“I don’t know where it happened. All I know is it happened,” he told Retraction Watch, a blog that tracks corrections in academic papers. “It’s our fault for not figuring it out before.”

The journal said the error doesn’t change the main conclusions of the paper, which found that “personality traits do not cause people to develop political attitudes.”

But professor Steven Ludeke of the University of Southern Denmark, who pointed out the errors, told Retraction Watch that they “matter quite a lot.”

“The erroneous results represented some of the larger correlations between personality and politics ever reported; they were reported and interpreted, repeatedly, in the wrong direction,” he said.

(06-06-2019, 08:45 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: The journal said the error doesn’t change the main conclusions of the paper, which found that “personality traits do not cause people to develop political attitudes.”

(06-06-2019, 08:49 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: So if you're more liberal in the sack, you're more likely to be impulsive, sensation seeking, and domineering? Makes sense.

(06-06-2019, 08:33 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Interesting academic correction.

https://nypost.com/2016/06/09/science-says-liberal-beliefs-are-linked-to-pyschotic-traits/?fbclid=IwAR19UIvZIDHt-KmHsG_ic67HL5CBDOf3n8mTLo-JfKtDlp_9DxUKHX2Ela4

In the paper, psychoticism is associated with traits such as tough-mindedness, risk-taking, sensation-seeking, impulsivity and authoritarianism.

(06-06-2019, 08:58 PM)Dill Wrote: LOL Trump is liberal then??

Seriously, people ought to check definitions and read the paper, discussion of errors, and retraction before drawing any conclusions about what this means.  Learn a bit about the causation/correlation debate of personality/politics before deciding what this "error" means.

First step is to go beyond the New York Posts framing of what "science" says. Second is to take a close look at the definition of "psychoticism" used here.

This is turning out like the shrimp treadmill.

(06-06-2019, 08:57 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You're also more likely to be in the sack with a young goat.

OK, enough fun. Political party does not determine mental stability, but I have 0 problem with this guy pointing out a correction in an article that tried to paint it that way.

(06-06-2019, 08:58 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Looking forward to the “It doesn’t mean what we said it meant when we thought it was conservatives.”

(06-06-2019, 09:12 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Leave it to guys like you and Pat to suck all the fun out of Liberals suffering from psychoticism, demonstrated through their psychotic episodes, cause by the psychosis they developed from their belief in Liberal policies.  

(06-06-2019, 09:56 PM)Dill Wrote: OK, Here's what one author's retraction looks like, if you are interested.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ajps.12216

And here's what it looks like on Fox News.

https://video.foxnews.com/v/4936024725001/#sp=show-clips

(06-06-2019, 09:26 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Just to be clear, though, the original paper didn't suggest that political party determined mental stability. 

It identified a perceived correlation between religious and sexual conservative attitudes with psychoticism (which is a broad grouping of traits, not psychotic tendency) and then suggested that it in no\ way proved that our behavior traits alone determine our political affiliation.

No doubt third party people (likely entirely liberal) ran with this study and suggested that incorrectly. 

(06-06-2019, 10:08 PM)michaelsean Wrote: No I know. It means something different than what it used to mean. Now it means what it really meant all along. All it took to realize this is to switch who it pointed to.

(06-06-2019, 10:13 PM)bfine32 Wrote: psychoticism
NOUN
The condition or state of being psychotic or of being predisposed to develop psychosis; a scale in personality tests purporting to measure this.

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/psychoticism