< Return to Video

How your personality shapes your politics

  • 0:01 - 0:03
    I'm a political and social psychologist.
  • 0:04 - 0:07
    I study how people understand the world
  • 0:07 - 0:10
    and what this means for society
    and for democracy ...
  • 0:10 - 0:13
    which, as it turns out, is quite a lot.
  • 0:13 - 0:15
    Some people see the world
    as safe and good,
  • 0:16 - 0:18
    and this allows them
    to be OK with uncertainty
  • 0:18 - 0:22
    and to take time to explore and play.
  • 0:22 - 0:25
    Others are acutely aware
    of threats in their environment,
  • 0:25 - 0:28
    so they prioritize order
    and predictability
  • 0:28 - 0:31
    over openness and experimentation.
  • 0:32 - 0:33
    In my academic research,
  • 0:33 - 0:38
    I study how these two approaches
    shape how we think and feel
  • 0:38 - 0:40
    about everything from art to politics.
  • 0:41 - 0:43
    I also explore how political elites
  • 0:43 - 0:46
    and partisan media
    use these very differences
  • 0:46 - 0:49
    to engender hatred and fear
  • 0:49 - 0:54
    and how the economics of our media system
    exploit these same divides.
  • 0:55 - 0:56
    But after studying this,
  • 0:56 - 1:00
    I have come away not with a sense
    that we are doomed to be divided
  • 1:00 - 1:04
    but that it's up to us
    to see both sets of traits
  • 1:04 - 1:07
    as necessary and even valuable.
  • 1:08 - 1:13
    Take for example two men who have been
    so influential in my own life.
  • 1:14 - 1:16
    First, my late husband, Mike.
  • 1:16 - 1:20
    He was an artist who saw the world
    as safe and good.
  • 1:20 - 1:23
    He welcomed ambiguity
    and play in his life.
  • 1:23 - 1:25
    In fact, we met through improv comedy
  • 1:25 - 1:29
    where he taught improvisers
    to listen and be open
  • 1:29 - 1:32
    and to be comfortable not knowing
    what was going to happen next.
  • 1:33 - 1:36
    After we got married and had our baby boy,
  • 1:36 - 1:39
    Mike was diagnosed with a brain tumor.
  • 1:39 - 1:43
    And through months
    of hospitalizations and surgeries,
  • 1:43 - 1:45
    I followed Mike's lead,
  • 1:45 - 1:48
    trying to practice being open,
  • 1:48 - 1:52
    trying to be OK not knowing
    what was going to happen next.
  • 1:52 - 1:55
    It was Mike's tolerance for ambiguity
  • 1:55 - 1:58
    that allowed me to survive
    those months of uncertainty,
  • 1:58 - 2:03
    and that helped me explore new ways
    to rebuild my life after he died.
  • 2:04 - 2:07
    About a year and a half
    after Mike passed away,
  • 2:07 - 2:10
    I met my current husband, PJ.
  • 2:10 - 2:12
    PJ is a criminal prosecutor
  • 2:12 - 2:15
    who sees the world as potentially good
  • 2:16 - 2:19
    provided that threats
    are properly managed.
  • 2:19 - 2:22
    He also is someone
    who embraces order and predictability
  • 2:22 - 2:24
    in his daily routine,
  • 2:24 - 2:25
    in the foods that he eats,
  • 2:25 - 2:28
    in his selection of wardrobe.
  • 2:28 - 2:30
    And PJ has a vicious wit,
  • 2:30 - 2:32
    but he's also morally very serious
  • 2:32 - 2:35
    with a strong sense of duty and purpose.
  • 2:35 - 2:40
    And he values tradition,
    loyalty and family,
  • 2:40 - 2:42
    which is why at the age of 28
  • 2:42 - 2:45
    he did not hesitate to marry a widow,
  • 2:45 - 2:47
    adopt her baby boy
  • 2:47 - 2:49
    and raise him as his son.
  • 2:50 - 2:53
    It was PJ's need for certainty and closure
  • 2:53 - 2:55
    that brought stability to our lives.
  • 2:56 - 2:59
    I share these two stories of Mike and PJ
  • 2:59 - 3:01
    not just because they're personal,
  • 3:01 - 3:06
    but because they illustrate two things
    that I have found in my own research.
  • 3:06 - 3:11
    First, that our psychological traits
    shape how we engage with the world,
  • 3:11 - 3:13
    and second,
  • 3:13 - 3:17
    that both of these approaches
    make all of our lives possible.
  • 3:17 - 3:23
    Tragically though, political and economic
    incentives of our media environment
  • 3:23 - 3:26
    seek to exploit these differences
  • 3:26 - 3:27
    to get us angry,
  • 3:27 - 3:29
    to get our attention,
  • 3:29 - 3:31
    to get clicks
  • 3:31 - 3:32
    and to turn us against one another.
  • 3:33 - 3:35
    And it works.
  • 3:35 - 3:39
    It works in part because
    these same sets of traits
  • 3:39 - 3:42
    are related to core
    political and cultural beliefs.
  • 3:43 - 3:46
    For years, political
    psychologists have studied
  • 3:46 - 3:49
    how our psychological traits
    shape our political beliefs.
  • 3:49 - 3:51
    We've conducted experiments to understand
  • 3:51 - 3:58
    how our psychology and our politics shape
    how we respond to apolitical stimuli.
  • 3:58 - 3:59
    And this research has shown
  • 3:59 - 4:02
    that those people
    who are less concerned with threats,
  • 4:02 - 4:05
    who are tolerant of ambiguity,
  • 4:05 - 4:08
    these people tend to be
    more culturally and socially liberal
  • 4:08 - 4:12
    on matters like immigration
    or crime or sexuality.
  • 4:12 - 4:14
    And because they're tolerant of ambiguity,
  • 4:14 - 4:17
    they also tend to be OK with nuance
  • 4:17 - 4:21
    and they enjoy thinking
    for the sake of thinking,
  • 4:21 - 4:23
    which helps explain why it is
  • 4:23 - 4:27
    that there are distinct aesthetic
    preferences on the left and the right,
  • 4:27 - 4:29
    with liberals more likely
    than conservatives
  • 4:29 - 4:33
    to appreciate things like abstract art
  • 4:33 - 4:36
    or even stories that lack a clear ending.
  • 4:36 - 4:37
    In my experimental work,
  • 4:37 - 4:40
    I've also found that these
    differences help explain
  • 4:40 - 4:44
    why ironic, political satire
    is more likely to be appreciated
  • 4:44 - 4:47
    and understood by liberals
    than conservatives.
  • 4:48 - 4:49
    On the other hand,
  • 4:49 - 4:52
    those people who
    are monitoring for threats,
  • 4:52 - 4:54
    who prefer certainty and closure,
  • 4:54 - 4:59
    those tend to be our political,
    cultural, social conservatives.
  • 4:59 - 5:01
    Because they're on alert,
  • 5:01 - 5:04
    they also make decisions
    quickly and efficiently,
  • 5:04 - 5:07
    guided by intuition and emotion.
  • 5:07 - 5:09
    And we've found
    that these traits help explain
  • 5:09 - 5:13
    why conservatives enjoy
    political opinion talk programming
  • 5:13 - 5:17
    that clearly and efficiently
    identifies threats and enemies.
  • 5:18 - 5:20
    What is essential though
  • 5:20 - 5:23
    is that these propensities
    are not absolute --
  • 5:23 - 5:25
    they're not fixed.
  • 5:25 - 5:27
    There are liberals
    who are monitoring for threats
  • 5:27 - 5:31
    just as there are conservatives
    who are tolerant of ambiguity.
  • 5:31 - 5:33
    In fact, PJ's political beliefs
  • 5:33 - 5:36
    are not that radically different
    from those that Mike held.
  • 5:37 - 5:43
    The link between psychology
    and politics is contingent on context:
  • 5:43 - 5:46
    who we're with
    and what's going on around us.
  • 5:46 - 5:48
    The problem is that right now,
  • 5:48 - 5:50
    our dominant context,
  • 5:50 - 5:52
    our political and media context,
  • 5:52 - 5:57
    actually needs these
    differences to be absolute,
  • 5:57 - 5:59
    to be reinforced
  • 5:59 - 6:01
    and even to be weaponized.
  • 6:02 - 6:05
    For reasons related to power and profit,
  • 6:05 - 6:08
    some in politics and media
    want us to believe
  • 6:08 - 6:11
    that those people who approach
    the world differently from us --
  • 6:11 - 6:13
    the Mikes or the PJs --
  • 6:13 - 6:15
    themselves are dangerous.
  • 6:15 - 6:20
    And social media platforms
    use algorithms and microtargeting
  • 6:20 - 6:23
    to deliver divisive messages
  • 6:23 - 6:26
    in our preferred messaging aesthetic.
  • 6:26 - 6:30
    Messages that relate to politics,
    culture and race.
  • 6:30 - 6:35
    And we see the devastating effects
    of these messages every single day.
  • 6:35 - 6:39
    Americans who are angry
    and fearful of the other side.
  • 6:39 - 6:42
    Charges of the other side
    destroying America.
  • 6:43 - 6:45
    But stop and think for a moment.
  • 6:45 - 6:50
    What would happen if those differences
    had never been weaponized?
  • 6:51 - 6:54
    It is liberal inclinations
    towards openness and flexibility
  • 6:54 - 6:57
    that allow us to cope with uncertainty
  • 6:58 - 7:03
    and that allow us to explore new paths
    towards innovation, creativity --
  • 7:03 - 7:04
    scientific discovery.
  • 7:06 - 7:10
    Think of things like space travel
    or cures for diseases
  • 7:10 - 7:15
    or art that imagines
    and reimagines a better world.
  • 7:15 - 7:21
    And those conservative inclinations
    towards vigilance and security
  • 7:21 - 7:23
    and tradition.
  • 7:23 - 7:25
    These are the things that motivate us
  • 7:25 - 7:27
    to do what must be done
  • 7:27 - 7:29
    for our own protection and stability.
  • 7:30 - 7:33
    Think of the safety
    that's offered by our armed forces
  • 7:33 - 7:36
    or the security of our banking system.
  • 7:36 - 7:37
    Or think about the stability
  • 7:37 - 7:41
    that's offered by such democratic
    institutions as jury duty,
  • 7:41 - 7:45
    or cultural traditions
    like fireworks on the Fourth of July.
  • 7:46 - 7:51
    What if the real threat
    posed to society and democracy
  • 7:51 - 7:54
    is not actually posed by the other side?
  • 7:54 - 7:59
    What if the real danger is posed
    by political and media elites
  • 7:59 - 8:01
    who try to get us to think
  • 8:01 - 8:04
    that we'd be better off
    without the other side
  • 8:04 - 8:07
    and who use these divisions
    for their own personal,
  • 8:07 - 8:09
    financial, political benefit?
  • 8:11 - 8:15
    Mike and PJ engaged
    with the world very differently,
  • 8:15 - 8:19
    but these distinct approaches
    continue to enrich my life every day.
  • 8:20 - 8:23
    Instead of our political and media context
  • 8:24 - 8:27
    determining that
    the other side is the enemy
  • 8:27 - 8:30
    and lulling us into believing
    that that's true,
  • 8:30 - 8:34
    what if we choose to create the context?
  • 8:34 - 8:37
    Real people connecting
    with other real people,
  • 8:37 - 8:41
    appreciating these two approaches
    for what they are:
  • 8:41 - 8:46
    necessary gifts that can help us all
    survive and thrive together.
  • 8:48 - 8:49
    Thank you.
Title:
How your personality shapes your politics
Speaker:
Dannagal G. Young
Description:

more » « less
Video Language:
English
Team:
closed TED
Project:
TEDTalks
Duration:
09:04

English subtitles

Revisions Compare revisions