1 Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA.
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2019 Feb;45(2):224-239. doi: 10.1177/0146167218783192. Epub 2018 Jul 9.
We present a large exploratory study ( N = 15,001) investigating the relationship between cognitive reflection and political affiliation, ideology, and voting in the 2016 Presidential Election. We find that Trump voters are less reflective than Clinton voters or third-party voters. However, much (although not all) of this difference was driven by Democrats who chose Trump. Among Republicans, conversely, Clinton and Trump voters were similar, whereas third-party voters were more reflective. Furthermore, although Democrats/liberals were somewhat more reflective than Republicans/conservatives overall, political moderates and nonvoters were least reflective, whereas libertarians were most reflective. Thus, beyond the previously theorized correlation between analytic thinking and liberalism, these data suggest three additional consequences of reflectiveness (or lack thereof) for political cognition: (a) facilitating political apathy versus engagement, (b) supporting the adoption of orthodoxy versus heterodoxy, and (c) drawing individuals toward candidates who share their cognitive style and toward policy proposals that are intuitively compelling.
我们进行了一项大型探索性研究（N=15001），研究了认知反思与政治派别、意识形态和 2016 年总统选举投票之间的关系。我们发现，特朗普选民的反思程度低于克林顿选民或第三方选民。然而，这种差异的大部分（尽管不是全部）是由选择特朗普的民主党人造成的。相比之下，在共和党人中，特朗普和克林顿的选民是相似的，而第三方选民则更具反思性。此外，尽管总体而言，民主党/自由派人士比共和党/保守派人士更具反思性，但政治温和派和不投票者的反思性最低，而自由意志主义者的反思性最高。因此，除了之前理论上分析思维与自由主义之间的相关性之外，这些数据还表明，反思（或缺乏反思）对政治认知有三个额外的后果：（a）促进政治冷漠与参与，（b）支持正统观念而非异端观念，以及（c）将个体吸引到与他们的认知风格相似的候选人以及直观上令人信服的政策提案上。
