Look: What your reaction to someone's eye movements says about your politics

http://www.eurekalert.org ^ | December 9, 2010 | Unknown

[decimon]

Purple gaze.

[Quix]

LIBERAL CONSERVATIVE PERCEPTUAL RESPONSIVENESS DIFFERENCE DOCUMENTED

PING

[Christian Engineer Mass]

Synopsis of the above:
liberals move their eyes to look at what another person is looking at, even when it has nothing to do with what they are doing.

Totally confirms what I knew: libs are nosy, can’t mind their own business, and are easily led.

[ClearCase_guy]

Liberals may have followed the "gaze cues," meanwhile, because they tend to be more responsive to others, the study suggests.

Liberals are natural born followers who are easy marks for con men spouting Liberal drivel in a personal quest for power.

[relictele]

Well this explains the widespread belief in the existence of Obama’s Stash.

[Doogle]

[eak3]

They could have saved time and money on this study. Most conservatives have God as there moral center and there belief in him and the values that are teached in the Bible shape our very beings. Libs, for the most part, have no such moral anchor and are constantly searching for that happiness. I would go so far as to say that the Devil, to some knowingly, shapes there way of thinking. Greed and lust for power consume them and make them do the things they do.

[mewzilla]

There's a reason they're called sheeple, eh? :)

[decimon]

Totally confirms what I knew: libs are nosy, can’t mind their own business, and are easily led.

Assuming this study has meaning, you can read in to it what you please. The authors of the study seem to have done so.

[swatbuznik]

Hahaha! Nice!

[muawiyah]

Pretty much it ~ BTW, we have a lot of Freepers who consider this sort of psychological stuff a "soft science" little different than total BS.

On the other hand, people into advertising recognize it as quantification of something they've known for ages, and accordingly would identify it as a "hard science".

But, to get to the point. Going back in time we know people were either HUNTERS or THE HUNTED (that is, game animals), depending on where they were and what was about.

So you are waiting there in the blind and the game animal comes up and you take aim and suddenly your eyes are distracted by something the game animal is looking at. Ha, ha! It's a doe in heat.

Well, there goes the game animal and you just lost your shot, but you are compensated with Paleolithic porn!

Other hunters keep their mind on what's going on. Just as that buck starts looking up the arrow is on the way right into his heart.

Now let's say the game animal (the buck) looked up and saw a Panther just to your left.

As a Conservative hunter you've probably scanned around and seen him anyway and are prepared to take appropriate action ~ evasion or attack ~ while the Liberal hunter tracks the buck's gaze to the panther and still imagines the panther will prefer to eat the buck first!

If the Conservative hunter acts in time the Liberal hunter will not be eaten this time ~ but maybe later. Frankly, I'd get a different hunting partner.

[JaguarXKE]

I hope my tax dollars didn’t help pay for this drivel.

[davius]

I can attest to the validity of this study. When speaking to a liberal, I often find it useful to hold up my finger in front of their nose and then draw a path from their eyes to my eyes. Sometimes it is necessary to repeat the process every 30 seconds or so. This technique coupled with prompts to use complete sentences and the occasional reminder to use their words once resulted in a successful communication process. Of course, if a bunny goes by or a light bulb burns out then all bets are off.

[SubMareener]

Eye movements during a conversation indicate how you are accessing information, i.e. your modality. Eyes up => visualizing. Eyes to the side => hearing. Eyes down => feeling. One side, usually to the left as viewed by another, is constructing, the other side, usually to the right, is remembering. So if you ask your kid where they were, and their eyes move up an to the left, it is a good bet they are making up some picture of were they have been. If their words match modality of the eye movement, then it is a pretty good bet they are lying. See http://www.nlp-practitioners.com/interactive/nlp-eye-access-cues-game.php for a practice game.

[ElayneJ]

Interesting. I do believe libs and conservatives think differently. From what I’ve seen, libs base their decisions on on they FEEL - and they don’t often consider cause-and-effect. (Just my observation)

[UCANSEE2]

you can read in to it what you please. The authors of the study seem to have done so.

At first, I thought this was a satire piece, so I rechecked the author. Once I knew they were serious , I thought much the same thing you did.

My own PERSONAL conclusion from the tests is that is is POSSIBLE that conservatives feel more RESPONSIBLE for the TASK they are assigned, and STICK WITH THE JOB, keeping their eyes on the target.

Libs, otoh, are a bit more 'liberal' shall we say, about sticking to the rules.

The problem for me is how one goes about identifying someone as a conservative or a liberal. Just because someone votes for a Democrat doesn't make them a liberal, any more than voting for a Republican makes you a conservative.

[Westbrook]

> Liberals may have followed the “gaze cues,” meanwhile,
> because they tend to be more responsive to others, the
> study suggests.

Yes, of course, Liberals are so much more responsive to the needs of others.

A Liberal study conducted by Liberal professors, the results of which are interpreted to support Liberal talking points, is not a valid study.

[HangnJudge]

Interesting study
I must ponder on this one

It explains much of human behavior differences between
those who take on different political postures

[Madame Dufarge]

They did:

The study, funded in part by the National Science Foundation

[Madame Dufarge]

So liberals are shifty-eyed herd animals and conservatives have a tendency to remain focused.