Sensitive liberals and unfeeling conservatives?: Interoceptive sensitivity predicts political liberalism

The stark divide between the political right and left is rooted in conflicting beliefs, values, and personality—and, recent research suggests, perhaps even lower-level physiological differences between individuals. In this registered report, we investigated a novel domain of ideological differences in physiological processes: interoceptive sensitivity—that is, a person’s attunement to their own internal bodily states and signals (e.g., physiological arousal, pain, and respiration). We conducted two studies testing the hypothesis that greater interoceptive sensitivity would be associated with greater conservatism: one laboratory study in the Netherlands using a physiological heartbeat detection task and one large-scale online study in the United States employing an innovative webcam-based measure of interoceptive sensitivity. Contrary to our predictions, we found evidence that interoceptive sensitivity may instead predict greater political liberalism (versus conservatism), although this association was primarily limited to the American sample. We discuss implications for our understanding of the physiological underpinnings of political ideology.Social decision makin

Contracting COVID-19: a longitudinal investigation of the impact of beliefs and knowledge

Recent work has found that an individual’s beliefs and personal characteristics can impact perceptionsof and responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Certain individuals—such as those who are politicallyconservative or who endorse conspiracy theories—are less likely to engage in preventative behaviorslike social distancing. The current research aims to address whether these individual differencesnot only affect people’s reactions to the pandemic, but also their actual likelihood of contractingCOVID-19. In the early months of the pandemic, U.S. participants responded to a variety of individualdifference measures as well as questions specific to the pandemic itself. Four months later, 2120 ofthese participants responded with whether they had contracted COVID-19. Nearly all of our includedindividual difference measures significantly predicted whether a person reported testing positive forthe virus in this four-month period. Additional analyses revealed that all of these relationships wereprimarily mediated by whether participants held accurate knowledge about COVID-19. These findingsoffer useful insights for developing more effective interventions aimed at slowing the spread of bothCOVID-19 and future diseases. Moreover, some findings offer critical tests of the validity of suchtheoretical frameworks as those concerning conspiratorial ideation and disgust sensitivity within areal-world context.Social decision makin

Concern about salient pathogen threats increases sensitivity to disgust

Individuals vary in their sensitivity to disgust—differences that have implications for intergroup attitudes, political ideology, and beyond. However, the source of this variability in disgust sensitivity remains a subject of debate. In this work, we test the hypothesis that sensitivity to disgust is “calibrated” by an individual's concern about disease threats in their local ecology. Leveraging the COVID-19 pandemic, we obtain strong support for this hypothesis, finding that disgust sensitivity increased following the COVID-19 outbreak and that the degree of this increase was moderated by an individual's subjective concern about contracting the disease. This work fills a longstanding theoretical gap regarding the sources of variability in disgust sensitivity, while challenging the view that disgust sensitivity is an immutable individual difference. Given the role of disgust in motivating intergroup prejudice and political ideology, we anticipate that these increases in disgust sensitivity are likely to have important downstream societal implications.Social decision makin

Sensitive liberals and unfeeling conservatives?: Interoceptive sensitivity predicts political liberalism

The stark divide between the political right and left is rooted in conflicting beliefs, values, and personality—and, recent research suggests, perhaps even lower-level physiological differences between individuals. In this registered report, we investigated a novel domain of ideological differences in physiological processes: interoceptive sensitivity—that is, a person’s attunement to their own internal bodily states and signals (e.g., physiological arousal, pain, and respiration). We conducted two studies testing the hypothesis that greater interoceptive sensitivity would be associated with greater conservatism: one laboratory study in the Netherlands using a physiological heartbeat detection task and one large-scale online study in the United States employing an innovative webcam-based measure of interoceptive sensitivity. Contrary to our predictions, we found evidence that interoceptive sensitivity may instead predict greater political liberalism (versus conservatism), although this association was primarily limited to the American sample. We discuss implications for our understanding of the physiological underpinnings of political ideology.</p