Or, more specifically, the brain rewards itself for rejecting information that contradicts what it believes.
Using M.R.I. scanners, neuroscientists have now tracked what happens in the politically partisan brain when it tries to digest damning facts about favored candidates or criticisms of them. The process is almost entirely emotional and unconscious, the researchers report, and there are flares of activity in the brain’s pleasure centers when unwelcome information is being rejected.
“Everything we know about cognition suggests that, when faced with a contradiction, we use the rational regions of our brain to think about it, but that was not the case here,” said Dr. Drew Westen, a psychologist at Emory and lead author of the study, to be presented Saturday at meetings of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology in Palm Springs, Calif.
Participants, self-identified Bush or Kerry supporters, sat in an MRI and were shown cases (punched up for effect) where their favored candidates contradicted themselves.
After the participants read the contradictory comment, the researchers measured increased activity in several areas of the brain. They included a region involved in regulating negative emotions and another called the cingulate, which activates when the brain makes judgments about forgiveness, among other things. Also, a spike appeared in several areas known to be active when people feel relieved or rewarded. The “cold reasoning” regions of the cortex were relatively quiet.
Researchers have long known that political decisions are strongly influenced by unconscious emotional reactions, a fact routinely exploited by campaign consultants and advertisers. But the new research suggests that for partisans, political thinking is often predominantly emotional.
Well, isn’t that special? Though it sure explains a lot …
(via Marginal Revolution)
This is why I have become increasingly uncomfortable with the overheated rhetoric about supporters of ‘the other guy’. If you don’t like Bush (or Kerry), fine – let’s talk about him and see what’s what. But labels like ‘Dimmocrats’ or ‘Repugnicans’ sabotage what we should be doing, which is to build on what we have in common for a better foundation to tackle what we disagree on.
I am somewhat surprised that this is actually surprising to anyone. I mean, have you seen the smug grins on some of the political pundits on television these days? Their brain aren’t just rewarding them for not having to face reality or accept facts that show they might be wrong, they are practically orgasming at every opportunity to reject those pieces of information as they are presented to them.