Suchergebnisse

Motivated by earlier work studying the genetic basis of political attitudes (Martin, Eaves, Heath, Jardine, Feingold & Eysenck 1986, Alford, Funk & Hibbing 2005), researchers found that political behaviors such as voter turnout (Fowler, Baker & Dawes 2008), broader participation (Fowler, Baker & Dawes 2008), and partisan attachment (Settle, Dawes & Fowler 2009, Hatemi, Hibbing, Alford, Martin & Eaves 2009) also have a significant heritable component. These findings prompted a great deal of discussion and debate and helped spawn the nascent field of "genopolitics". However, in order to push this area of research forward scholars must identify causal mechanisms linking genes to political behaviors. The goal of this dissertation, which is made up of three distinct chapters, is to explore potential causal pathways my testing potential mediators such as personality traits and cognitive ability as well as identifying new genetic variants that may be associated with political behaviors. The first chapter presents a twin study testing whether the psychological traits cognitive ability, personal control, and extraversion mediate the relationship between genes and political predisposition and acts of participation. The second chapter is a candidate gene association study that tests the hypothesis that extraversion mediates a relationship between a variant of the COMT gene and partisan attachment. The third chapter presents the results from a genome-wide association study of validated voter turnout in the 2010 election. To complete this work I have utilized four novel genetically informative data sets. Two of these data sets were constructed here at UCSD, one at the University of Minnesota, and another with a research team from Sweden. All three studies shed new light on the relationship between genes and these political behaviors. However, the mediation results from Chapter 1 and Chapter 2 suggest only a modest amount of the relationship between genes and political behaviors are mediated by personality traits and cognitive ability. In addition, the investigation of over 500,000 genetic variants presented in Chapter 3 did not turn up many new significant associations. However, all three chapters provide a template for how future work in this area should be done as well as highlight the pitfalls in this burgeoning area of research

AbstractSome constitutional scholars suggest that the US Constitution stands as one of the oldest yet least changed national constitutions in part because Americans' tendency to "revere" the Constitution has left them unwilling to consider significant changes to the document. Several recent studies support aspects of this claim, but no study establishes a direct link between individuals' respect for the Constitution and their reluctance to amend it. To address this, we replicate and extend the research design of Zink and Dawes (2016) across two survey experiments. The key difference in our experiments is we include measures of respondents' propensity to revere the Constitution, which in turn allows us to more directly test whether constitutional veneration translates into resistance to amendment. Our results build on Zink and Dawes's findings and show that, in addition to institutional factors, citizens' veneration of the Constitution can act as a psychological obstacle to constitutional amendment.

AbstractThis article examines the effect of high school civic education on voter turnout in adulthood by integrating extensive academic transcript data on social studies and civic coursework into a large-scale, longitudinal survey of a nationally representative sample of adolescents. In an initial series of regression models, civics courses appear to have an effect on turnout in adulthood. However, after accounting for individual and family attributes, civic education has a fairly limited effect on turnout, though several measures have statistically significant effects even in the presence of controls. Interestingly, the study finds no support for the idea that high school courses that focus on service learning, civic skills development or political issues increase turnout in adulthood, which is contrary to expectations from the resource model of participation. After subjecting the civic effects that persist after accounting for controls to additional scrutiny by using family fixed-effects models that account for all observed and unobserved influences shared by siblings in the same family (for example, socialization, predispositions, etc.), the evidence suggests that there is a null relationship between civic education and turnout; the best-case scenario is that any civic education effects that do exist are likely very small. The idea that additional civics training will help to substantially elevate voter turnout appears to be overly optimistic.

ObjectiveResearch on political socialization has shown that political and civic experiences during high school can impact later political engagement. However, political scientists are increasingly realizing that nonpolitical experiences, dispositions, and attributes in childhood and adolescence can play a role in shaping political participation. Building on recent studies in developmental psychology, we examine whether and how student characteristics and behaviors in adolescence are related to political engagement in adulthood.MethodsUsing data from the Project Talent study, a national longitudinal study of a representative sample of high school students in the United States, we find that several behaviors and attributes related to one's high school experience have long‐term effects on voter turnout.ResultsResponsible students and those with high levels of interest in school are more likely than their counterparts to vote when they reach adulthood.ConclusionThe effects of the school‐related measures we examine (1) persist for more than a decade after high school ends, (2) are similar in magnitude to the effects of classic predictors of political engagement such as parental political activism, and (3) hold even in the presence of controls for general personality traits, cognitive ability, resources such as parental socioeconomic status, socialization experiences, and demographic variables. Our results have implications for how to increase political participation.

We examine the role of moral foundations and system justification in explaining support for Donald Trump in the 2016 general election using data from the 2016 Cooperative Congressional Election Survey. A number of important findings emerge. First, we find that there are important partisan and ideological differences when it comes to moral foundations and system justification. Second, we find that moral foundations predict support for Trump above and beyond traditional determinants of vote choice such as ideology, partisanship, religiosity, and demographic characteristics. Third, we find that a measure of political system justification is not related to vote choice in our sample. This casts doubt on the idea that support for Trump was mostly about protesting the political system. This paper adds to the growing body of research showing that psychological concepts and theories are important in understanding voter decision-making in the 2016 presidential election and in elections more generally.

Political scientists have long been interested in the determinants of political knowledge. In many studies, education is the strongest predictor of political knowledge. However, some studies have found that education has no effect on knowledge once confounding variables are taken into account. In addition, some recent work suggests that education remains the strongest predictor of knowledge even after accounting for confounders like personality traits and intelligence. We provide new evidence on the effect of education on political knowledge by utilizing the co-twin control design. By looking at the relationship between education and knowledge within monozygotic twin pairs, we are able to circumvent sources of confounding of the relationship due to genetic factors and early-life family environment because monozygotic twins share both. We find that the relationship between education and political knowledge is highly confounded by genes and/or familial environment. The results from a naive model that does not take into account unobserved family factors indicate that education has a positive and statistically significant effect on political knowledge. However, in a twin fixed-effects model that accounts for confounding due to genetic factors and familial socialization, we find that the effect of education on political knowledge drops substantially and is not statistically significant at conventional levels.

Political scientists have long known that the sense of civic duty is one of the strongest predictors of individual voter turnout, yet scholars are only just starting to study and understand the origins of this orientation. Recent genopolitics research has indicated that the sense of civic duty is heritable, and recent research in political psychology has illustrated that individual personality traits, many of which have a heritable component, shape feelings of civic obligation. In this article, we link these two lines of inquiry to better understand how individual differences shape the sense of civic duty. More specifically, we explore the relationship between personality traits, measured using the Big Five model; genes; and the sense of civic duty. We show that genetic factors account for between 70% and 87% of the correlation between civic duty and four of the Big Five personality traits. Overall, the results presented here expand our understanding of the process through which prosocial orientations, such as civic duty, are formed.

Political interest is one of the strongest predictors of individual political engagement, but little is known about the origins of this political orientation. The goal of this paper is to clarify the role that biological and psychological factors play in the formation of political interest. A series of recent studies in genetics have illustrated that political interest is heritable, and a series of recent studies in political science and psychology have demonstrated that personality traits, many of which are heritable, are related to political interest. In this paper, we make a number of contributions to the literature: (1) we replicate previous analyses showing that political interest and personality traits are heritable, (2) we demonstrate that personality traits are related to interest, and (3) we estimate the extent to which genetic factors account for the correlation between personality traits and political interest. Using two datasets on twins, we find evidence that genetic factors account for a large amount of the correlation between political interest and personality traits. This study provides a more nuanced picture of the biological and psychological bases of political orientations.