Physiology and political beliefs: A response to Knoll, O’Daniel, and Cusato

In a recent paper in this journal, Knoll et al. question three studies from our laboratory. In this response to that paper, we address deficiencies in their “reproduction.” Notably, we demonstrate that their data provide little evidence of a negativity bias among research subjects, suggesting a fail...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inResearch & politics Vol. 3; no. 3
Main Authors Peterson, Johnathan C., Smith, Kevin B., Hibbing, John R.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published London, England SAGE Publications 01.07.2016
SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC
SAGE Publishing
Subjects
Bias
Data collection
Physiology
Political ideologies
Political physiology
political ideology
political biology
political behavior
negativity bias
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:In a recent paper in this journal, Knoll et al. question three studies from our laboratory. In this response to that paper, we address deficiencies in their “reproduction.” Notably, we demonstrate that their data provide little evidence of a negativity bias among research subjects, suggesting a failure not only to reproduce findings from our earlier studies, but also a failure to find a widely acknowledged universal human physiological response trait. This situation raises a number of questions regarding the data on which their analyses are based. We explore these questions below and speculate that Knoll et al.’s data collection procedures may compromise their ability to speak to the external validity of earlier studies.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
ISSN:2053-1680
2053-1680
DOI:10.1177/2053168016662892