Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Political Ideology Shapes How People Perceive Temperature

Posted by timothy on from the and-who-wants-t'-know? dept.

benfrog writes "In what likely isn't that much of a surprise, a study has shown that political ideology shapes how we perceive temperature changes (but not drought/flooding conditions). (An abstract of the study is here. 8,000 individuals were asked about temperatures and drought/flood events in recent years, then their political leanings. Answers regarding drought/flood events tended to follow the actual changes in conditions, while answers regarding temperature tended to follow people's political beliefs."

15 of 193 comments (clear)

  1. The next question is... by SpryGuy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...when looked at by political groupings, did any particular political grouping's perceptions of the temperate correlate more closely to reality than the others?

    i.e. was there one or more political ideologies that was more divorced from reality than the others, by any meaningful statistical deviation? Or were they all off, just in different directions based on political ideology?

    --

    - Spryguy
    There are three kinds of people in this world: those that can count and those that can't
    1. Re:The next question is... by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 5, Funny

      What do you think you're doing! This article is about an inflammatory correlation. If you don't limit your observations, you might be in danger of committing Science!

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    2. Re:The next question is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Republicans: "It can never be warm enough, as long as it's profitable."
      Democrats: "It's already way too warm."
      Libertarians: "Don't worry about how warm it is at my house, just worry about your own house."

    3. Re:The next question is... by Baloroth · · Score: 4, Informative

      To quote TFA:

      In fact, the actual trends in temperatures had nothing to do with how people perceived them. If you graphed the predictive power of people's perceptions against the actual temperatures, the resulting line was flat—it showed no trend at all. In the statistical model, the actual weather had little impact on people's perception of recent temperatures. Education continued to have a positive impact on whether they got it right, but its magnitude was dwarfed by the influences of political affiliation and cultural beliefs.

      And those cultural affiliations had about the effect you'd expect. Individualists, who often object to environmental regulations as an infringement on their freedoms, tended to think the temperatures hadn't gone up in their area, regardless of whether they had. Strong egalitarians, in contrast, tended to believe the temperatures had gone up.

      So nope, no matter what your political beliefs, your perception of the temperature is wrong (unless, possibly, you have neutral beliefs, I don't see anything that mentions that).

      --
      "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
    4. Re:The next question is... by BStroms · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Skimming the article, it doesn't even seem they considered a very real possibility. That political bias doesn't affect how people perceive temperature, but that people tend to answer polls in a way that reflects well on their personal beliefs even if they know that answer isn't entirely truthful.

    5. Re:The next question is... by dyingtolive · · Score: 4, Funny

      This would not get upmodded enough if it went to 11.

      --
      Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
    6. Re:The next question is... by Greenspark · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That kind of bias is present in any self-reported survey. The findings should discuss what the population 'reported' and not what they 'believe.' Obviously, the article is also biased in it's title -- declaring that ideology shapes perception. It could also be concluded that perception determines ideology. In one paradigm, your affiliations warp what you perceive, and in another paradigm, you chose to affiliate with those who share your perceptions-- accurate or otherwise. So they need to remember that correlation doesn't imply causality.

    7. Re:The next question is... by slew · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My personal opinion is that this whole exercise isn't much different than asking a person if they thought the price of milk or the price of gas went up more in the last decade (or similar question).

      I'd wager that most people wouldn't have any clue because the random person doesn't pay any attention to these things, so they would guess. That guess would likely not depend at all on any variable except their political beliefs.

    8. Re:The next question is... by IndigoDarkwolf · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The abstract concludes that talking about changes in precipitation are more likely to convince people of climate change.

      Sure it will. Until their favored politicians tell them one way or the other, at which point I'll bet dollars to yuan that the same statistical anomaly appears for perceptions in precipitation change.

    9. Re:The next question is... by Quirkz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's not certain groups, that's almost universal. It takes a certain enlightenment to be able to understand people you disagree with or explain their positions without demonizing them. Very few people seem to be able to do that.

      --
      The Quirkz Handbook of Self-Improvement for People Who Are Already Pretty Okay
  2. This doesn't surprise me by dkleinsc · · Score: 5, Informative

    Basic cognitive dissonance modelling has demonstrated repeatedly that when a person encounters incontrovertible facts that contradict deeply held beliefs, the facts are discarded.

    --
    I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  3. Another possibility by Nidi62 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Look at a political map of the US, and what's the first thing that pops out at you? A lot more conservatives live in the southern US. Most of the places where conservatives tend to live are warm, while liberals tend to live in cooler areas. People in areas that are normally cooler would be more likely to notice an increase in temperature than people in areas that are generally warmer. Personally, I'm used to 80%+ humidity and upper 90s-low 100s myself, so this summer has actually seemed pretty mild in comparison to what I'm used to. But that has nothing to do with whether or not I believe in global warming. It has more to do with the kind of weather I am acclimated to.

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  4. Conservatives think it's cooler? by Eevee · · Score: 4, Funny

    It seems the other way for me. I'm a rather left-leaning type and I say it's 33 right now, but the conservative in the next cube over keeps saying it's 97.

  5. Re:Belief will make it so. by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 4, Informative

    From what I've read, the global-warming theories call for unpredictable temperature swings - hot and cold - as the planet adjusts, so extreme cold at times is expected...

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  6. Re:Belief will make it so. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    1) Any particular year could just be a fluke. Anyone who claims a hot/cool year is evidence for/against climate change is completely ignorant of basic climate science and/or thinks you are.
    2) "So maybe we're experiencing both global warming and cooling at the same time!" -- That is exactly correct -- the climate is changing. Parts will get hotter, parts will get cooler. The overall trend is up, hence the name "global warming". We're going to lose some arable land but we'll gain some as well. What scares me is sea level rise -- take a look at population density maps over the world to see what I mean.
    3) There is no good faith debate on whether the climate is changing, and practically none on whether it is the result of human activities. But that doesn't mean that every climate scientist with a model knows the future, or that any particular prediction is correct. What we do know for sure is that human activities are having measurable effects on a highly chaotic system on which we depend for the survival of our civilization. I like to keep my experiments in the lab.