Research by UCLA political scientists into the "facial competence" of candidates puts the Republican VP hopeful in the top 5%.Their paper (http://renos.bol.ucla.edu/AtkinsonEnosHill.pdf ) shows that facial competence explains a significant portion of the vote — about 4% of independent voters in a congressional election.Here’re some more details: http://renos.bol.ucla.edu/AtkinsonEnosHill.pdf
Maybe that will hold on Election Day,
but between a week ago and today, Palin’s
poll numbers have gone from 53% approve to
35% disapprove, to 44% approve to 48% disapprove.
We economists are bad enough. Our neighbors in Poli-Sci are completely lame. Nothing but attenuated tools from marketing, psychology, and even economics. Give up the ghost–call it political studies not political
science. Its the work of Ekman in psychology being lifted by the Poli-sci weasels. Yeah, some of
my best friends are but please if a good idea that has influenced politics or anything for that matter
has come out of political science word of it has failed to get out…and I am next to a poli-sci dept. Lame
tool borrowers at best.
When it comes to faces (does that sound wrong or what?) it’s all about symmetry. But aside from that truism, those wacky biology types have figured out who is likely to sociology-loving, pro-safety net empathizers…
“Political attitudes have been thought to be shaped only by experiences and environment, but research is now beginning to show that some of our responses to events may be “hard wired” Oxley et al. (SCIENCE, 321, 5896: p. 1667) found that individuals who had the strongest eye and skin responses to unexpected noises or threatening pictures (such as the picture of a spider crawling on a person’s eyeball) also tended to endorse political positions that were interpreted as protective of social groups.”
Note it says “strongest” not just any reaction. Leads to an interesting test regime…
Palin doesn’t even beat Romney on that scale.
Wow. Academic pots calling academic kettles black.
I wonder if anyone’s studied the impact of field pride (or insecurity?) on biases. For example, did the need among economists to show how scientific their field was result in an over-dependence on flawed numerical models and the “enshrining” of efficient market theory? How many equations were in Wealth of Nations, anyway?
Considering academics can’t even figure out the politics of their own universities, I think you’d give the polisci guys some slack for not figuring out a slightly more complicated system like, say, a country.
Considering academics can’t even figure out the politics of their own universities….
Do political science departments apply the results of their own discipline in their departmental and interdepartmental politics?
That would give them a giant unfair advantage! Somebody needs to do something, apply some sort of handicap to political science departments when they do faculty politics, so the other departments will have a fighting chance.
If you have to buy vis, please come to our company.
Is it realistic?
Comments on this entry are closed.