Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Paper Retracted After Incorrectly Labeling Conservatives
Retraction Watch ^

Posted on 06/18/2016 4:53:33 PM PDT by CriticalJ

Wonder how many times the original was sited on MSNBC.

Conservative political beliefs not linked to psychotic traits, as study claimed

Researchers have fixed a number of papers after mistakenly reporting that people who hold conservative political beliefs are more likely to exhibit traits associated with psychoticism, such as authoritarianism and tough-mindedness.

As one of the notices specifies, now it appears that liberal political beliefs are linked with psychoticism. That paper also swapped ideologies when reporting on people higher in neuroticism and social desirability (falsely claiming that you have socially desirable qualities); the original paper said those traits are linked with liberal beliefs, but they are more common among people with conservative values.



TOPICS: Technical; US: New York
KEYWORDS: 2016election; demagogicparty; election2016; liberalmedia; memebuilding; mentalillness; newyork; partisanmediashill; partisanmediashills; trump

1 posted on 06/18/2016 4:53:33 PM PDT by CriticalJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: CriticalJ

OH, REALLY?


2 posted on 06/18/2016 4:58:16 PM PDT by Stayfree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CriticalJ

“Cited”


3 posted on 06/18/2016 4:58:55 PM PDT by BenLurkin (The above is not a statement of fact. It is either satire or opinion. Or both.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CriticalJ

Put the authors and reviewers in the Laughing Stocks....


4 posted on 06/18/2016 5:06:10 PM PDT by Paladin2 (auto spelchk? BWAhaha2haaa.....I aint't likely fixin' nuttin'. Blame it on the Bossa Nova...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

““Cited””

Oops.


5 posted on 06/18/2016 5:13:03 PM PDT by CriticalJ (Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress.. But then I repeat myself. MT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: CriticalJ

The damage has already been done.


6 posted on 06/18/2016 5:16:30 PM PDT by Rusty0604
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CriticalJ

See how easy it is for that retraction thing to happen?


7 posted on 06/18/2016 5:20:05 PM PDT by Paladin2 (auto spelchk? BWAhaha2haaa.....I aint't likely fixin' nuttin'. Blame it on the Bossa Nova...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: CriticalJ
Wonder how many times the original was sited on MSNBC.

It may have been sighted on MSNBC's website numerous times while it was sited there. A thorough count would be need to deterine how often it had been cited by others.

8 posted on 06/18/2016 5:21:23 PM PDT by Bob (No, being a US Senator and the Secretary of State are not accomplishments; they're jobs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CriticalJ

Mistake my @ss.


9 posted on 06/18/2016 5:21:56 PM PDT by Talisker (One who commands, must obey.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bob
...would be needed to...

Proofread before hitting Post, dummy.

10 posted on 06/18/2016 5:23:45 PM PDT by Bob (No, being a US Senator and the Secretary of State are not accomplishments; they're jobs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: CriticalJ

Few would define good to exclude themselves.
I’ve participated in many psychology studies on Amazon Mturk, knowing I’m one of the few conservatives doing so. Observations include:
* an overwhelming assumption that novelty seeking is a good thing
* that anything that can be labeled fear of the other is bad, see assumption above
* valuing sexual purity and sexual exclusivity is a sign of a limited mind, see above assumptions
* that evil is always the result of mental illness or stupidity or lack of education - they cannot include in their views that someone would deliberately harm others for pleasure and personal gain per an intelligent plan with no concern for others
* that everyone is basically good, see assumption above


11 posted on 06/18/2016 5:24:08 PM PDT by tbw2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bob

The proper usage, in this case, is CITED.


12 posted on 06/18/2016 5:34:50 PM PDT by Tucker39 (Welcome to America! Now speak English; and keep to the right....In driving, in Faith, and politics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Talisker

A classic case of bias confirmation. Too funny....


13 posted on 06/18/2016 5:35:40 PM PDT by Paladin2 (auto spelchk? BWAhaha2haaa.....I aint't likely fixin' nuttin'. Blame it on the Bossa Nova...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Tucker39

Of course it was. I was just providing two alternatives which were also used properly.


14 posted on 06/18/2016 5:46:24 PM PDT by Bob (No, being a US Senator and the Secretary of State are not accomplishments; they're jobs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: CriticalJ
And? Any right-thinking person already knows liberals are nucking futs. That's why we're conservatives.


15 posted on 06/18/2016 5:56:49 PM PDT by Viking2002 (The Avatar is back by popular request.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson