PPA 691 – Policy Analysis

1. PPA 691 – Policy Analysis Lecture 3b – Genetics, Political Orientation, and Problem Structuring

2. Source: • John R. Alford, Carolyn L. Funk, and John R. Hibbing. • Are political orientations genetically transmitted? • American Political Science Review, 99 (May), 153-168.

3. Attitude Formation • Traditional literature: attitudes are a combination of longstanding predispositions and more recent “off-the-top-of-the-head” considerations. • Predispositions are believed to be a distillation of a person’s lifetime experiences, including childhood socialization and direct involvement with the raw ingredients of policy issues.

4. Attitude Formation • Most traditional research focused on relative influences of early childhood socialization versus adult socialization. • Absent from the discussion is the possibility that certain attitudes and behaviors might be partially attributable to genetic factors.

5. Genetics and Attitudes • But, what physical process would allow a genetic allele to shape a political attitude? • Clearly, a specific gene generally cannot cause a specific behavior. • However, genetics is interactive. It makes individuals more sensitive to the external factors in their environment.

6. Heritability Theory • Comparison of monozygotic and dizygotic twins. Perfect natural experiment. • Monozygotic (identical) twins share 100% of their DNA. Dizygotic twins share 50%. Must assume that environment affects the two types of twins equally.

7. Heritability Theory • Influences of an individual trait are divided thusly: • H (heredity) + E (environment). • E can be divided between shared environment and unique environment. • Statistically (controlling for parental traits and assortative mating), it is possible to partition attitude variance on all three factors.

8. Predictions from Behavioral Genetics • Political attitudes are heritable. • Attitudes more central to core personality traits are more heritable than attitudes that are less central. • Example: “Openness” is often cited as a central personality trait, and is clearly relevant to political attitudes.

9. Methods • Wilson-Patterson attitude inventory. • 28 items – school prayer, property tax, Moral Majority, capitalism, astrology, the draft, pacifism, unions, Republicans, socialism, foreign aid, X-rated movies, immigration, women’s liberation, death penalty, censorship, living together, military drill, gay rights, segregation, busing, nuclear power, Democrats, divorce, abortion, modern art, federal housing, liberals.

10. Methods • Formulas for decomposition of effects. • Heritability: 2*(MZ – DZ) correlations. • Shared Env.: (2*DZ)-MZ correlations. • Unique Env.: 1 – MZ correlations. • Model assumes that parents correlate at zero. If parental attitudes are shared, shared environment will be overstated and inherited characteristics will be understated. Must control for parental attitudes.

11. Heritability of Political Attitudes • Across the 28 items, heritability varies from .18 to .41. • On a scale of all 28 items, heritability is .32, shared is .16, and unshared is .53. • Controlling for assortative mating and shared parental attitudes, heritability is .53, shared is .11, and unshared is .36.

12. Heritability of Political Attitudes • Other less central values. • Educational attainment: • H: .40; SE: .46; UE: .14. • Party identification: • H: .14; SE: .41; UE: .45. • Results produce similar coefficients in Australia.

13. Implications • Two probable orientations: • Absolutist: • Suspicion of out-groups. • Desire for in-group conformity and strong leadership. • Desire for clear, unbending moral and behavioral codes (strict constructionists). • Fondness for swift and severe punishments for violations of the code (death penalty). • A fondness for systemization (procedural due process). • A willingness to tolerate inequality (opposition to redistributive policies). • An inherently pessimistic view of human nature (Hobbesian).

14. Implications • Contextualist. • Relatively tolerant attitude toward out-groups. • A desire to take a more context-dependent rather rule-based approach to proper behavior (substantive due process). • An inherently optimistic view of human nature (people should get the benefit of the doubt). • A distaste for preset punishments (mitigating circumstances). • A preference for group togetherness, but not unity. • Suspicion of hierarchy, certainty, and strong leadership. • An aversion to inequality. • Greater empathetic tendencies (rehabilitate, don’t punish).

15. Implications • Precursor to basic cleavages in society. • Politics (conservative-liberal). • Religion (fundamentalist – secular humanist). • Law (procedural versus substantive due process). • Education (phonics versus whole language). • Art (traditional form-based realism versus modern free-from impressionism). • Sports (football/frisbee). • Medicine (traditional AMA/wholistic). • Morality (enduring standards/situational ethics). • Scientific inquiry (formal/empirical).

16. Implications • All the vexing dichotomies are based on a fundamental genetic divide. • Of course, most people have shades of these divisions. • Plus, 36% of predispositions are shaped by unique environmental influences.

17. Policy Analysis Implications • Central to problem definition. • Competing definitions of ill-structured problems. • Ill-structured problems are by definition central to the core values of the stakeholders, making compromise and shared definitions difficult. • Conclusion: 50% heritability makes problem structuring extraordinarily difficult; but, the 36% unique environment gives hope.