Dataset Information

Does Biology Justify Ideology? The Politics of Genetic Attribution.

ABSTRACT: Conventional wisdom suggests that political conservatives are more likely than liberals to endorse genetic explanations for many human characteristics and behaviors. Whether and to what extent this is true has received surprisingly limited systematic attention. We examine evidence from a large U.S. public opinion survey that measured the extent to which respondents believed genetic explanations account for a variety of differences among individuals as well as groups in society. We find that conservatives were indeed more likely than liberals to endorse genetic explanations for perceived race and class differences in characteristics often associated with socioeconomic inequality (intelligence, math skills, drive, and violence). Different ideological divisions emerged, however, with respect to respondents' explanations for sexual orientation. Here, liberals were more likely than conservatives to say that sexual orientation is due to genes and less likely to say that it is due to choice or the environment. These patterns suggest that conservative and liberal ideologues will tend to endorse genetic explanations where their policy positions are bolstered by "naturalizing" human differences. That said, debates over genetic influence may be more politicized with respect to race, class, and sexual orientation than population differences generally: We find that left/right political ideology was not significantly associated with genetic (or other) attributions for individual differences in intelligence, math skills, drive, or violence. We conclude that conceptions of the proper role of government are closely intertwined with assumptions about the causes of human difference, but that this relationship is a complex one.

SUBMITTER: Suhay E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4567596 | biostudies-literature | 2013

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Does Biology Justify Ideology? The Politics of Genetic Attribution.

Suhay Elizabeth E Jayaratne Toby Epstein TE

Public opinion quarterly 20130101 2

Conventional wisdom suggests that political conservatives are more likely than liberals to endorse genetic explanations for many human characteristics and behaviors. Whether and to what extent this is true has received surprisingly limited systematic attention. We examine evidence from a large U.S. public opinion survey that measured the extent to which respondents believed genetic explanations account for a variety of differences among individuals as well as groups in society. We find that cons ...[more]

PMID: 26379311

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveStudies have found that affected individuals who believe the cause of their disorder is genetic may react in various ways, including optimism for improved treatments and pessimism due to perceived permanence of the condition. This study assessed the psychosocial impact of genetic attribution among people with epilepsy.MethodsStudy participants were 165 persons with epilepsy from multiplex epilepsy families who completed a self-administered survey. Psychosocial impact of epilepsy was assessed with the Impact of Epilepsy Scale, containing items about relationships, employment, overall health, self-esteem, and standard of living. Genetic attribution was assessed using a scale derived from three items asking about the role of genetics in causing epilepsy in the family, the chance of having an epilepsy-related mutation, and the influence of genetics in causing the participant's epilepsy. We estimated prevalence ratios (PRs) for impact of epilepsy above the median using Poisson regression with robust standard errors, adjusting for number of lifetime seizures and time since last seizure.ResultsParticipants' age averaged 51 years; 87% were non-Hispanic white, 63% were women, and 54% were college graduates. The genetic attribution scale was significantly associated with having a high impact of epilepsy (adjusted PR = 1.4, 95% confidence interval = 1.07-1.91, P = .02). One of the three genetic attribution questions was also significantly associated with a high impact of epilepsy (belief that genetics had a big role in causing epilepsy in the family, adjusted PR = 1.8).SignificanceThese findings reflect an association between the psychosocial impact of epilepsy and the belief that epilepsy has a genetic cause, among people with epilepsy in families containing multiple affected individuals. This association could arise either because belief in a genetic cause leads to increased psychosocial impacts, or because a greater psychosocial impact of epilepsy leads some to believe their epilepsy is genetic.

Project description:ObjectivesRapid advances in genetic research and increased use of genetic testing have increased the emphasis on genetic causes of epilepsy in patient encounters. Research in other disorders suggests that genetic causal attributions can influence patients' psychological responses and coping strategies, but little is known about how epilepsy patients and their relatives will respond to genetic attributions of epilepsy. We investigated the possibility that among members of families containing multiple individuals with epilepsy, depression, the most frequent psychiatric comorbidity in the epilepsies, might be related to the perception that epilepsy has a genetic cause.MethodsA self-administered survey was completed by 417 individuals in 104 families averaging 4 individuals with epilepsy per family. Current depression was measured with the Patient Health Questionnaire. Genetic causal attribution was assessed by three questions addressing the following: perceived likelihood of having an epilepsy-related mutation, perceived role of genetics in causing epilepsy in the family, and (in individuals with epilepsy) perceived influence of genetics in causing the individual's epilepsy. Relatives without epilepsy were asked about their perceived chance of developing epilepsy in the future, compared with the average person.ResultsPrevalence of current depression was 14.8% in 182 individuals with epilepsy, 6.5% in 184 biologic relatives without epilepsy, and 3.9% in 51 individuals married into the families. Among individuals with epilepsy, depression was unrelated to genetic attribution. Among biologic relatives without epilepsy, however, prevalence of depression increased with increasing perceived chance of having an epilepsy-related mutation (p = 0.02). This association was not mediated by perceived future epilepsy risk among relatives without epilepsy.SignificanceDepression is associated with perceived likelihood of carrying an epilepsy-related mutation among individuals without epilepsy in families containing multiple affected individuals. This association should be considered when addressing mental health issues in such families.

Project description:ObjectiveThe impact of cognitive function and decline on political ideology is unknown. We studied the relationship between cognition and both political orientation and political policy choices in a population of older persons.DesignLongitudinal investigation.SettingA retirement community and its surroundings in Southern California.Participants151 members of a longitudinal investigation of aging and dementia in the oldest-old (the 90+ Study), mean age 95 years.MeasurementsParticipants self-reported their political ideology (7-point scale from extremely liberal to extremely conservative) and policy preferences for federal spending on public schooling, aid to the poor, and protecting the environment, as well as on preferences on immigration rates, death penalty, and university admission. The same political survey was mailed to participants twice: at time one and 6-months later. Cognitive function based on neurological examination and cognitive testing was classified as normal (55%), cognitive impairment/not dementia (CIND) (33%), or dementia (12%). We calculated rank correlations between ideology and policy choices, stratified by cognitive status, and agreement between Surveys 1 and 2.ResultsPolitical ideology/orientation was highly consistent over a six-month period (84% agreement) among the 122 who returned the second survey, with no significant relationship to cognitive status. Among cognitively impaired (CIND and dementia), however, there was significant loss of consistency between an individual's political orientation and their policy choices. Level of political engagement was high for participants, with more than 90% voting in the 2016 presidential election.ConclusionIn this population of older persons, political identification on the liberal-conservative spectrum was resilient despite cognitive decline, but its meaning and function were changed. For the cognitively impaired it remained a self-defining label, but no longer operated as a higher order framework for orienting specific policy preferences. There appeared to be loss of coherence between the political orientation and political policy choices of cognitively impaired individuals. Given the high level of political engagement of these individuals, these results have substantial public policy implications.

Dataset Information

Does Biology Justify Ideology? The Politics of Genetic Attribution.

Publications

Does Biology Justify Ideology? The Politics of Genetic Attribution.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets