Political conservatism predicts asymmetries in emotional scene memory

Abstract

Variation in political ideology has been linked to differences in attention to and processing of emotional stimuli, with stronger responses to negative versus positive stimuli (negativity bias) the more politically conservative one is. As memory is enhanced by attention, such findings predict that memory for negative versus positive stimuli should similarly be enhanced the more conservative one is. The present study tests this prediction by having participants study 120 positive, negative, and neutral scenes in preparation for a subsequent memory test. On the memory test, the same 120 scenes were presented along with 120 new scenes and participants were to respond whether a scene was old or new. Results on the memory test showed that negative scenes were more likely to be remembered than positive scenes, though, this was true only for political conservatives. That is, a larger negativity bias was found the more conservative one was. The effect was sizeable, explaining 45% of the variance across subjects in the effect of emotion. These findings demonstrate that the relationship between political ideology and asymmetries in emotion processing extend to memory and, furthermore, suggest that exploring the extent to which subject variation in interactions among emotion, attention, and memory is predicted by conservatism may provide new insights into theories of political ideology.

Conservatism and the neural circuitry of threat: economic conservatism predicts greater amygdala–BNST connectivity during periods of threat vs safety

“…A growing body of literature links conservatism to an increased threat bias ( Hibbing et al , 2014 ). Participants who are high in conservatism exhibit increased capture of attention by task-irrelevant aversive stimuli ( Carraro et al , 2011 ; McLean et al , 2014 ), have better memory for negative vs positive scenes ( Mills et al , 2016 ), and when shown a variety of images, spend more time viewing negative ones ( Dodd et al , 2012 ). High conservatism is also related to greater skin conductance responses to aversive stimuli ( Oxley et al , 2008 ; Smith et al , 2011 ; Dodd et al , 2012 ), and increased levels of self-reported phobic-fears ( Hatemi et al , 2013 ).…”

Romanticizing bureaucratic leadership? The politics of how elected officials attribute responsibility for performance

“…Such tendencies might be reinforced by basic psychological differences between ideological perspectives. Recent evidence moreover suggests that conservatives to a greater extent than liberals are prone to negativity bias; that is, they pay attention and respond more strongly to negative information than to equivalently positive information (Carraro, Castelli, & Macchiella, 2011;Mills et al, 2016). We therefore expect that:…”

“…The area we study here-public school education-is traditionally affiliated with liberal rather than conservative political parties (Moe, 2013), and this has also been the case in Denmark. Recent evidence moreover suggests that conservatives to a greater extent than liberals are prone to negativity bias; that is, they pay attention and respond more strongly to negative information than to equivalently positive information (Carraro, Castelli, & Macchiella, 2011;Mills et al, 2016). Such tendencies might be reinforced by basic psychological differences between ideological perspectives.…”

Believing Chicken Little: Evolutionary Perspectives on Credulity and Danger

“…This variation correlates with differences in political orientation, as political conservatives exhibit more overarching negativity bias, and more attention and reactivity toward threats, than do political liberals Lilienfeld & Latzman, 2014;Ahn et al, 2014;Mills, Smith, Hibbing, & Dodd, 2014;Mills et al, 2016; but see Knoll, O'Daniel, & Cusato, 2015). Correspondingly, and critical for the present purposes, conservatives tend to see the world as more dangerous than do liberals (Federico, Hunt, & Ergun, 2009).…”