所提供的主要的解释是，该领域具有anticonservative偏压。 我毫不怀疑，这 存在偏差，但它没有强大到足以推谁在他们似乎离开率瘦保守出了场的人。
我曾经是自由主义者。 我认为，保护个人自由是法律的最高宗旨，政府应在塑造人们的行为没有任何作用。 这些观点倾向于共和党的立场上多如枪支管制，环境政策和戒毒治疗问题，民主党的人保持一致。
一个完美的自由意志的社会不需要法律来保护环境，例如，因为每个 同质libertus 将考虑在每个他或她做这个决定对环境的影响。 社会对环境的关怀会自动在其公民的选择中得到反映。
有很多人，但是这三个最淋漓尽致地展现在缺陷 同质libertus 假设。
学习社会心理学首先改变有关枪支管制我的看法。 Homo libertus would follow first principles when deciding to use force: only out of self-defense, and only when there is a real threat of harm.
But we now know that people’s perceptions of threat are a blend of objective reality and subjective interpretation. The experience of threat is informed by our snap judgments of the situation and our preconceptions about the potential attacker.
For instance, people are more likely to shoot an unarmed black man than an unarmed white man. This is true of just about everyone, including 非裔美国人, highly trained 警务人员, and people who are horrified at the thought of having a racial bias and motivated to be egalitarian. Also, the mere presence of a gun primes people for aggression, making violence more likely even when there is no rational basis for it.
Implicit biases, including ones that go against our overt beliefs, can sneak into life-and-death decisions. This knowledge convinced me that giving even the most well-intentioned people total liberty with guns leads to outcomes that violate equality and justice.
Case Study #2: Charity
Decisions about charitable giving are another example. Government aid to foreign countries is unnecessary, I used to think, because if people care about what happens outside the US, then they’ll give money directly to those in need.
It turns out that we humans often have noble, charitable intentions, but we behave in strange and irrational ways when it comes to actual giving.
For example, people give more money to save the life of one person who is vividly portrayed than to save hundreds of people who are depicted as statistics, a phenomenon known as the identifiable victim effect.
Even when victims are equally identifiable, we tend to give less money when there are more of them. If a 同质libertus cared enough to donate $X to one person, then he would donate at least that much to two people. The fact that real humans act in the opposite way made me realize that formalizing our support for those in need through foreign aid and similar policies is a logical way for people in our society to ensure that we act on our charitable intentions.
Case Study #3: Self-control And Bad Behavior
A final example of how social psychology made me more liberal comes from my own research on self-control.
The libertarian view places the responsibility for choices and their consequences entirely on the individual. We have the right to engage in unhealthy behaviors such as cigarette-smoking or excessive eating, and the downstream problems arising from those behaviors are ours alone.
However, unlike 同质libertus, many factors outside of our control interfere with our ability to quit smoking or eat healthfully. Simply being poor reduces self-control. Being abused or neglected as a child reduces self-control 和 increases the risk of substance use as an adult. In a perfect world, we would all have sufficient self-control to align our intentions neatly with our actions.
But in this world, where we do not, the fact that some people are saddled with deficits whose seeds were sown before birth undermines the libertarian assumption that people are capable, autonomous decision-makers.
These are just three examples, but I think they illustrate well the ways that the idealized folk psychology that underpinned my libertarian politics collapsed in the face of social psychological evidence.
You might think this means I think people aren’t responsible for their behavior, but actually I just think that we have a different kind of responsibility. The fact that we’re not always in total control of our immediate actions means that we have even greater responsibility to construct our situations and our institutions in alignment with our deep values.
As I continue to study social psychology, I increasingly believe in the importance of policies that recognize and accommodate the realities of human psychology, which necessarily insert certain roles for government in our everyday lives. And I bet I’m not the only one.
Elliot Berkman is Assistant Professor, Psychology at University of Oregon. Examples of his research include fMRI studies of basic goal-relevant processes such as self-regulation and inhibitory control, experimental studies on how approach and avoidance motivation relate to emotions and performance, and longitudinal studies on real-world goals such as smoking cessation and dieting.