walksalone
New member
Yes, once again, ex-girlfriend bat sh#t crazy...
I'm not the one who got all high and mighty. I thought you were gonna blow your O ring and crap all over your chair
Hidden Posts
- Thread starter Drowning_in_the_Sea_of_Red
- Start date
I'm not the one who got all high and mighty. I thought you were gonna blow your O ring and crap all over your chair
walksalone
New member
Last edited by a moderator:
Green Lantern
New member
You are absolutely right. We should teach our children that it's ok for dad to get head from someone besides mom, then lie about it.
It'sNotAFakeID
New member
Sub-Husker
New member
Sure... if Bill Clinton said that somewhere in his speech that you tried unsuccessfully to quote, then I concur.
Last edited by a moderator:
Pedro Guerrero
Team HuskerBoard
Redtillimdead
Pedro Guerrero
Team HuskerBoard
Redtillimdead
jamrinelli
New member
If anyone wants a link to watch his signing pm me
jamrinelli
New member
Anyone need a link to watch him choose the huskers PM me!!!!
Tree Planter
New member
Cognitive abilities have important implications for interpersonal behaviors and relations. Studies have shown that individuals with lower levels of general intelligence (g) are less trusting of other people, less sensitive to interpersonal cues, and less accurate in deciphering other people’s behaviors and intentions (Murphy & Hall, 2011;Sturgis, Read, & Allum, 2010). Our research builds on this emerging psychological literature and concerns the socially important but surprisingly underexamined relation between g and intergroup prejudice (i.e., negative evaluations of out-groups). In a targeted analysis, we evaluated whether (a) g (as a generalized cognitive ability) predicts out-group prejudice and (b) right-wing conservative ideologies and a lack of contact with out-groups mediate the link between cognitive ability and prejudice.
Since the mid-20th century, researchers have posited an association between g and prejudice (Adorno, Frenkel-Brunswik, Levinson, & Sanford, 1950; Allport, 1954), and early evidence suggested a negative correlation between intelligence and prejudice toward out-groups (Wagner & Schönbach, 1984). Recent studies have similarly reported negative correlations between scores on intelligence subscales and racism (Deary, Batty, & Gale, 2008; Schoon, Cheng, Gales, Batty, & Deary, 2010) and between abstract reasoning and prejudice toward homosexuals (Keiller, 2010). However, rather than addressing the implications of mental ability, research on prejudice has focused overwhelmingly on motivational cognitive styles (e.g., Jost, Glaser, Kruglanski, & Sulloway, 2003), including intolerance of ambiguity and a preference for simple answers (see Van Hiel, Onraet, & De Pauw, 2010). Although research has revealed that the effects of cognitive style on prejudice are mediated by right-wing ideologies (e.g., Van Hiel, Pandelaere, & Duriez, 2004), empirical findings and theoretical accounts of whether (or how) cognitive ability contributes to prejudice are conspicuously absent from contemporary literature and textbooks on prejudice.
Since the mid-20th century, researchers have posited an association between g and prejudice (Adorno, Frenkel-Brunswik, Levinson, & Sanford, 1950; Allport, 1954), and early evidence suggested a negative correlation between intelligence and prejudice toward out-groups (Wagner & Schönbach, 1984). Recent studies have similarly reported negative correlations between scores on intelligence subscales and racism (Deary, Batty, & Gale, 2008; Schoon, Cheng, Gales, Batty, & Deary, 2010) and between abstract reasoning and prejudice toward homosexuals (Keiller, 2010). However, rather than addressing the implications of mental ability, research on prejudice has focused overwhelmingly on motivational cognitive styles (e.g., Jost, Glaser, Kruglanski, & Sulloway, 2003), including intolerance of ambiguity and a preference for simple answers (see Van Hiel, Onraet, & De Pauw, 2010). Although research has revealed that the effects of cognitive style on prejudice are mediated by right-wing ideologies (e.g., Van Hiel, Pandelaere, & Duriez, 2004), empirical findings and theoretical accounts of whether (or how) cognitive ability contributes to prejudice are conspicuously absent from contemporary literature and textbooks on prejudice.
Last edited by a moderator:
Tree Planter
New member
We propose that right-wing ideologies, which are socially conservative and authoritarian (see Jost et al., 2003; Van Hiel et al., 2010), represent a mechanism through which cognitive ability is linked with prejudice. According to contemporary theoretical approaches, such ideologies are characterized by resistance to change and the promotion of intergroup inequalities (Jost et al., 2003).1 A recent comprehensive meta-analysis confirmed a reliable negative relation between cognitive ability and right-wing ideologies (Van Hiel et al., 2010). For example, research has revealed that individuals who more strongly endorse social conservatism have greater cognitive rigidity (Rokeach, 1948), less cognitive flexibility (Sidanius, 1985), and lower integrative complexity (Jost et al., 2003). Socially conservative individuals also perform less well than liberals on standardized ability tests (Stankov, 2009). Right-wing authoritarianism (Altemeyer, 1996), a strong correlate of social conservatism (Jost et al., 2003; Van Hiel et al., 2010), is also negatively associated with g(McCourt, Bouchard, Lykken, Tellegen, & Keyes, 1999).
Last edited by a moderator:
Tree Planter
New member
Given that cognitive abilities are critical in forming individuated impressions of other people and in being open-minded (Scarr & Weinberg, 1981) and trusting of other people (Sturgis et al., 2010), individuals with lower cognitive abilities may gravitate toward more socially conservative right-wing ideologies that maintain the status quo and provide psychological stability and a sense of order (Jost et al., 2003). This rationale is consistent with findings that less intelligent children come to endorse more socially conservative ideologies as adults (Deary et al., 2008; Schoon et al., 2010).
Furthermore, compared with liberals, individuals who endorse right-wing ideologies are more fearful and anxious that out-groups will cause the disintegration of societal moral standards and traditions (Altemeyer, 1996; Jost et al., 2003; Sibley & Duckitt, 2008). Consistent with this apprehension is the well-established relation between right-wing ideologies and attitudes toward out-groups, whereby both conservatism (Van Hiel et al., 2004) and authoritarianism (Altemeyer, 1996; Hodson & Costello, 2007; Sibley & Duckitt, 2008) are associated with heightened prejudice. Recent meta-analyses have confirmed that there are strong positive correlations between right-wing ideologies and prejudice (see Sibley & Duckitt, 2008). However, the endorsement of right-wing ideologies is not synonymous with prejudice against out-groups (Sniderman & Tetlock, 1986). According to social-dominance theory, the positive association between right-wing ideologies and negative evaluations of out-groups reflects the fact that both constructs share the core psychological element of a desire for hierarchies among groups (Sidanius, Pratto, & Bobo, 1996). Socially conservative ideologies have therefore been conceptualized as “legitimizing myths”: Although they are often rooted in socially acceptable values and traditions, such ideologies nonetheless facilitate negative attitudes toward out-groups (Sidanius & Pratto, 1999; see also Jost et al., 2003; Sidanius et al., 1996; Van Hiel et al., 2010).
Furthermore, compared with liberals, individuals who endorse right-wing ideologies are more fearful and anxious that out-groups will cause the disintegration of societal moral standards and traditions (Altemeyer, 1996; Jost et al., 2003; Sibley & Duckitt, 2008). Consistent with this apprehension is the well-established relation between right-wing ideologies and attitudes toward out-groups, whereby both conservatism (Van Hiel et al., 2004) and authoritarianism (Altemeyer, 1996; Hodson & Costello, 2007; Sibley & Duckitt, 2008) are associated with heightened prejudice. Recent meta-analyses have confirmed that there are strong positive correlations between right-wing ideologies and prejudice (see Sibley & Duckitt, 2008). However, the endorsement of right-wing ideologies is not synonymous with prejudice against out-groups (Sniderman & Tetlock, 1986). According to social-dominance theory, the positive association between right-wing ideologies and negative evaluations of out-groups reflects the fact that both constructs share the core psychological element of a desire for hierarchies among groups (Sidanius, Pratto, & Bobo, 1996). Socially conservative ideologies have therefore been conceptualized as “legitimizing myths”: Although they are often rooted in socially acceptable values and traditions, such ideologies nonetheless facilitate negative attitudes toward out-groups (Sidanius & Pratto, 1999; see also Jost et al., 2003; Sidanius et al., 1996; Van Hiel et al., 2010).
Last edited by a moderator:
Tree Planter
New member
Together, the well-established theoretical and empirical links between lower g and greater right-wing ideology and between greater right-wing ideology and heightened prejudice suggest a mediating mechanism (Baron & Kenny, 1986) by which lower gmay be associated with greater prejudice. We propose a model (see Fig. 1) in which lower g predicts greater right-wing ideology (Path a) and greater right-wing ideology predicts more prejudicial attitudes (Path b). Furthermore, although we expected that lower g itself predicts greater prejudice (Path c), we hypothesized that this association is facilitated in large part by right-wing ideology (i.e., through Path a and Path b). Therefore, we expected that if right-wing ideology (i.e., the mediator) is included in the predictive model, the anticipated negative direct effect between g and prejudice (Path c′) will be substantially attenuated or statistically nonsignificant; such a finding would support a significant negative indirect effect (the product of Paths a and b; Shrout & Bolger, 2002). Thus, individuals with lower cognitive ability may be more attracted to right-wing ideologies that promote coherence and order, and because such ideologies emphasize the maintenance of the status quo, they may foster greater out-group prejudice.
Last edited by a moderator:
Tree Planter
New member
Fig. 1.
Hypothesized mediation model showing the relation between cognitive ability and prejudicial attitudes as mediated by right-wing ideology. Path a represents the negative effect of general intelligence (g) on right-wing ideology, Path b represents the positive effect of right-wing ideology on prejudicial attitudes, Path c represents the negative direct effect of general intelligence (g) on prejudice, and Path c′ represents the effect of g on prejudice after controlling for the mediator.
[/left]