Volokh Conspirator (and NU law professor)
J
ames Lindgren is here at UCLA today to present a paper on Chasing
Cherished Superstitions About Conservatives to the Federalist Society.
I'm a big fan of Lindgren's work, which is widely acknowledged to be
fair and balanced in assessing empirical data. His talk today is a
reply to the "
study" by John Jost et al. that "found," as Byron York put
it, that "
conservatives
are crazy."
Lindgren points out some flaws with the data Jost et al. used. First,
they use a definition of conservative that includes people like Hitler
and Stalin. Second, the data they rely on claims that women are more
conservative than men, while Lindgren points out that every major
survey find the opposite. Third, the surveys used in the Jost et al.
meta-analysis assume that conservatives are less well-educated than
liberals, while the widely used General Social Survey finds the
opposite.
An email by Lindgren that was quoted some months ago by a
blogger summarizes some of the many other
data points Lindgren offers as rebutting the Jost
analysis:
The Jost article claims that conservatives are
angry and fearful and it builds on a literature that claims that
conservatives are unhappy. I find this strange, given the decades of
superb data showing the opposite. In the NORC General Social Survey (a
standard social science database, second only to the U.S. Census in use
by U.S. sociologists), the GSS asks the standard survey question about
happiness in general. In the 1998-2002 GSS, extreme conservatives are
much more likely to report being "very happy" than extreme liberals--
47.1% to 31.6%. Earlier years show a similar
pattern.
This conservative happiness carries
over into most other aspects of life as well. Conservatives usually
report being happier in their jobs than liberals. In the 2002 GSS, for
example 65.2% of extreme conservatives report being "very satisfied"
with their jobs in general, while only 50% of extreme liberals report
being very satisfied. When the question is broadened to satisfaction
with job or housework, a similar pattern obtains. In the 1998-2002 GSS,
61.0% of extreme conservatives reported being very satisfied, compared
to 53.6% of extreme liberals.
As to finances,
in the 1998-2002 GSS 34% of extreme conservatives report being
satisfied with their finances compared to 26.4% of extreme liberals.
More extreme liberals (34.5%) than extreme conservatives (25.8%) report
being "not at all satisfied" with their
finances.
Conservatives usually tend to report
less marital unhappiness than liberals. In the 1998-2002 GSS, 5.1% of
those who report being "slightly liberal" say that they are "not too
happy" in their marriages, compared to 0.9% of those who are "slightly
conservative." Ordinary liberals (3.7%) and extreme liberals (8.9%)
also differ from ordinary conservatives (2.4%) and extreme
conservatives (4.1%) in the levels of reported marital unhappiness.
Indeed, in the 1998 GSS, 18.2% of extreme liberals reported that their
marriages were "not too happy," while only 1.6% of extreme
conservatives reported marital
unhappiness.
Earlier General Social Surveys
found that conservatives were more satisfied with their health, their
friendships, their family life, and the city or place they live--all in
all, a remarkably consistent picture.
Another
claim in the Jost paper is that conservativism is driven by anger and
fear. Again, their claims conflict with some of the highest quality
data available. In the 1996 GSS, questions were asked about anger and
fearfulness. Extreme conservatives were much less likely to report
being mad at someone every day in the last week--7.3% to 24.2% for
extreme liberals. Extreme conservatives were also less likely to report
being fearful in the last week--32.5% to 56.3% for extreme liberals. In
other words, a staggering one-quarter of extreme liberals report being
mad at someone EVERY DAY and most extreme liberals report being fearful
at least once a week.
I am surprised that the
Jost group was not aware of the very strong and remarkably consistent
data that conservatives report being happier than liberals about their
lives in general, their jobs, their finances, their health, their
friendships, their family life, and where they live. Nor does the Jost
group deal with the less extensive data suggesting that conservatives
are less fearful and less angry than liberals. I will have to look into
more of the studies that Jost cites to see why these fairly obvious
patterns are missed. I wonder whether Jost relied too much on studies
that either used unrepresentative samples (such as undergraduates) or
used biased questions or indices -- asking about issues on which
conservatives tend to be unhappy but not about issues on which liberals
tend to be unhappy. In either event, the Jost group seems to have
missed decades of very high quality survey data that undercut their
thesis.
More by Lindgren on this topic
here. See also non-
Lindgren commentary
here.
All of this does raise an interesting question: what makes someone a
liberal or conservative? Nature or nuture? Environment, education, or
economic success/failure? My guess is that conservatives and liberals
tend to be born, not made. Doubtless factors like environmental and
class play into it, but my guess is that we tend to be hardwired for
one side or the other. (When I asked Lindgren this question, he
suggested looking at twin studies, which apparently are the classic way
of doing nature versus nurture studies. A
post over at the
2Blowhards discusses a twin study that seems to confirm the nature
hypothesis.)
Sidenote: Lindgren notes that he can't study libertarian attitudes is
because the number of people who self-report to the GSS as libertarians
is so small that they don't even collect the data. Heh.