Personality and Political Polarization
Conservatives, when you think of a typical liberal, what words come to mind? Emotional? Lazy? Liberals, how would you describe the average conservative? Cold-hearted? Close-minded? According to a 2019 Pew Research poll, most Americans believe in these common stereotypes. Only 3 percent of Republicans believe that Democrats are hard working or intelligent compared to the average American. On the other side of the aisle, only 5 percent of Democrats believe that Republicans are morally-sound compared to other Americans, 4 percent believe they are equally as honest, and a whopping 75 percent believe that they are more close-minded. The image of the inconsiderate, heartless Republican lives in Democrats’ minds, and when Republicans hear “Democrat” they think of over-sensitivity and the denial of logic.
If you ask personality psychologists, these stigmas actually have some basis to them. No, not in the sense that liberals are indeed “snowflakes” and conservatives do in fact hate everyone. Rather, there are core differences between the personalities of most liberals and most conservatives that account for their differing perspectives on political issues. By exploring the relationship between personality and political affiliation, there may be a way to spin this association into a cure for the political polarization plaguing this nation.
In order to start this exploration, first the personality spectrum must be understood. While many people may be familiar with the Myers-Briggs Test that provides participants with a four letter personality code (i.e. INTJ), this is not the model used by most modern day psychologists. The more widely accepted model consists of five basic aspects of personality, commonly called the “Big 5 Personality Traits.”
First comes openness, the measure of one’s willingness to experience new adventures and ideas. People who are high in openness have a larger comfort zone to begin with, but are also more eager to push past the boundaries of discomfort. On the other hand, those who are low in openness are creatures of habit. Next comes conscientiousness. This trait accounts for someone’s ability to control impulses and achieve goal-directed behavior. Someone high in conscientiousness is usually a diligent planner and highly organized, while people low in this trait dislike structure and prefer going with the flow. Third is a trait that most people are familiar with: extraversion. To be high in extraversion means to gain energy from being in the company of others, whereas people low in extraversion recharge with alone time. The next trait is agreeableness, which can be broken down into compassion and politeness. While being low in agreeableness doesn’t necessarily make someone selfish or rude, people who are low in the trait are more likely to be hostile, competitive, and antagonistic. The fifth and final trait is neuroticism, which is generalized by measuring one’s tendency to feel negative emotion. Those high in neuroticism tend to be high strung, prone to sadness, anxiety, and irritability, while those low in neuroticism experience more emotional stability. Together, openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism make up one’s personality.
Cambridge University was able to find associations between these five personality traits and political affiliation in the United States. The most obvious predictors of political affiliation in relation to personality pertain to the traits of conscientiousness, neuroticism, and openness. Being high in conscientiousness is associated with a 34 percent increase in conservatism, specifically a 22 percent increase in economic conservatism and a 26 percent increase in social conservatism. These statistics help illustrate that the magnitude of conscientiousness’ effect on political affiliation is similar to that of common predictors of political ideology like education and income level. Being high in emotional stability (i.e. low in neuroticism) is just as strongly associated with general conservatism, even more strongly associated with economic conservatism, but slightly less with social conservatism. Conversely, openness is a strong predictor of liberalism. Being in the top percentiles of openness is associated with a 48 percent increase in economic liberalism, 53 percent increase in social liberalism, and 66 percent increase in liberalism overall. While these three traits have the strongest association with general political affiliation, other traits are good predictors in specific facets of ideology. For example, agreeableness is simultaneously associated with liberal economic attitudes and conservative social attitudes. Effects of extraversion on political ideology are more mild, leaning slightly rightward, but it is a strong predictor of political participation.
Some may see these correlations as bad news for political polarization. After all, these findings imply that changing one’s political ideology might, in fact, require changing their personality. Changing one’s personality, which has been shaped by genetics, parental upbringing, personal experience, and likely a multitude of other factors that psychologists are yet to study, is not an easy task. However, I encourage Americans to look at this as cause for hope, rather than strife. By looking at this correlation from a specific angle, it could be a method of possible compromise between the ever-growing animosity defining American politics.
The largest problem with political polarization is not that we disagree, it is that we immediately discount those with whom we disagree on the basis of character flaws. Political disagreement, per se, is not necessarily a bad thing. It's when we allow these disagreements to set our country into political paralysis that it becomes a problem. It’s when we immediately discount our opponents for being stupid, thoughtless, or (ironically) too close-minded, instead of working towards political compromise, that it becomes pathetic. What if, instead of accusing each other of these negative attributes, we accept that some of our disagreements come from our differences in personality, not IQ. After all, if you meet someone more extraverted, agreeable, or neurotic than you, your first instinct isn’t that they’re stupid. It’s likely closer to “they’re just different than me.” If conservatives start viewing liberals as open and agreeable, rather than wimpy and sensitive, and liberals start viewing conservatives as conscientious and level-headed, rather than rigid and cold-hearted, America can work towards productive compromise, rather than tragic self-destruction.