I would have interpreted the stronger response of conservatives to mean that they were more ready to take action themselves while the liberals would wait around for someone else to respond.
the researchers clearly measured something that produced statistically significant results. Conservatives blink their eyes at air puffs more than liberals. To impute some “fear” factor is going too far in the interpretation, though. They will have to do other studies, eeg, mri, PET scans, etc. to construct some kind of physiological map of what else is happening. What other brain areas are linked up? Are they going to find two different types of maps that fit nicely with political differences? Maybe, maybe not. The work should be done.
Moreover, it may well be proven that brains can be trained with biofeedback to be more one type or another. That would flush the DNA theory down the drain. Or even hypnosis. Now there’s a question. Not everyone can be hypnotized. Is it easier to hypnotize liberals or conservatives? Let me think...
No, I give this paper some validity - but it is weak, vague and over-interpreted. A small sample from one town is a very good way to control for confounding factors, but it should be expanded. In a way, this is like the right brain - left brain stuff from years ago. It started out with a simple set of ideas - Left brain dominant = rational, analytical, linguistic, Right brain dominant = intuitive, visual, perceptual...
Later research showed that in larger populations these categories were compromised, but still not lacking in some validity.
Similarly, neural differences between liberal and conservative may have a simple basis, but it will get lost in a greater set of complex neural relationships.
Excellent point. I agree with that.