This Is Your Brain on Politics

By JOSHUA FREEDMAN
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/18/opinion/18freedman.html?oref=login&th

Los Angeles — PRESIDENT BUSH begins his second term this week as the leader of a nation that appears to be sharply divided. Since the election, there's been endless discussion about the growing gap between "red" and "blue" America. When former President Bill Clinton said a few months ago that he was probably the only person in America who liked both Mr. Bush and Senator John Kerry, it seemed it might be true.

Yet, surprisingly, recent neuroscience research suggests that Democrats and Republicans are not nearly as far apart as they seem. In fact, there is empirical evidence that even the fiercest partisans may instinctively like both Mr. Bush and Mr. Kerry, although they struggle against this collaborative impulse.

During the eight months before the election, I was part of a group of political professionals and scientists from the University of California, Los Angeles, who used functional magnetic resonance imaging, or f.M.R.I., to scan the brains of 10 Republicans and 10 Democrats, producing images like those seen above. We measured brain activity while subjects looked at political advertisements and at images of the presidential candidates.

The news media have focused on our finding that the amygdala, a part of the brain that responds to danger, was more heightened in Democrats when viewing scenes of 9/11 than in Republicans. This might seem to indicate fundamental differences, but other aspects of our results suggest striking commonalities.

These patterns of brain activity, made visible on the f.M.R.I.'s, suggest that both Bush and Kerry voters were mentally battling their attraction to the other side. Bush voters wanted to follow Mr. Kerry; Kerry voters found appeal in Mr. Bush. Both groups fought this instinct by arguing to themselves that their impulses were wrong. By recalling flaws associated with the opposition, the voters displaced attraction with dislike. Because the process happened nearly instantaneously, only the final sense of dismay reached full awareness.

Simplifying the neurophysiology somewhat, one can regard the process of reaching an opinion or making a choice as a collaboration between two regions of the brain - the limbic area, which feels emotions, and the prefrontal cortex, which controls the processing of ideas and information. The two areas work in tandem: thoughts provoke feelings, and in turn, the intensity of these feelings determines how the thoughts are valued. In reacting to pictures of the opposing candidate, the voters we tested countered the feelings of connection with even stronger hostile emotions, which they induced by calling up negative images and ideas.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

so what your saying is...

so what your saying is...

I'm not sure what this proves

I just thought it would give us something interesting to talk about.

I am wondering if they know and if so how they know, that we don't make all of our decisions this way. Coming to value judgements first with an open mind and then evaluating from past experience of the situation.

"Both groups fought this instinct by arguing to themselves that their impulses were wrong. By recalling flaws associated with the opposition, the voters displaced attraction with dislike. Because the process happened nearly instantaneously, only the final sense of dismay reached full awareness."

Might this be the way that we make most of our decisions, rather than some aberration that happens only in politics or when choosing a leader? I just can't imagine that there is any part of my mind that could like Bush, even for a second.

Proud  member of the reality based  community

Brain on Politics

With all due respect to the 'scientists' who did this study, I think it is a bunch of crap. There is no way I have ever been conflicted about my feelings for George W. Bush. I do admit that I was not too pleased with John Kerry either, but at least I could respect him based on his past history with the Viet Nam War.
It seems to me that 20 brain scans is such a miniscule sampling as to be totally without meaning or credibility.

20 brain scans

only constitutes a control group, at best. This little excercise is truly an example of poor science.

I thought it was fun

Everything doesn't have to be deadly serious around here ya know ;)

Come on admit it we secretly like Bush hehehehe

Proud  member of the reality based  community

HOHOHO

He does provide endless amusement if nothing else.

This clarifies everything

Is this supposed to help me understand anything? I thought that if you were a member of the Republican Party you didn't have any brain activity or any neurons for compassion and humanity. My observations are not however based on scientific study but are purely from my life experiences. I never liked neurophysiology anyway. Also, I also have never been conflicted about George Bush.

Actually

I was listening to a program ( I think it was on the science channel, but am not sure, because there was a lot going on in the house at the time) where a scientist was talking about a growing belief that there is a gene for compassion and that the same kind of MRI testing can spot those who have the capacity for compassion and those who don't.

So maybe republicans just can't help it? ;)

Proud  member of the reality based  community

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.