| Zkuq said: Admittedly I've only skimmed through the important parts of the study, but based on that, I think this seems like a really poor thing to pick out from the study - possibly even because this might not have been a focus of the study, but also because important context was left out (excerpt from the discussion section): "It is possible that holding extreme (and thus unnegotiable) attitudes on important social-political issues has become increasingly identity defining for Democrats, not least in response to Donald Trump's controversial presidency. The pattern does not imply that Republicans are more tolerant than Democrats, nor that Republicans could deal better with attitudinal uncertainty. It does imply, however, that –at this particular moment in time– Democrats and Republicans are constructing and managing their partisan identities differently in relation to the topics reflected in these questionnaire items. Research suggests that social category membership (e.g., being White, Christian) is more important for the construction of Republican identity than it is for Democrat identity (Mason & Wronski, 2018). Fulfilling such normative criteria may hence qualify someone as a valid group member even if that same person may hold somewhat liberal views on, for example, gay marriage." I feel like having this context from the start would have greatly benefitted discussion, which seems mostly of quite low quality to me at the moment. Research in general should, in my opinion, be cited and drawn conclusions from only very carefully, because it's incredibly easy to draw the wrong conclusions and focus on the wrong things if you're not an expert on the subject. |
Honestly, the entire thread has flaws and I'm leaning towards locking it.
1. As far as I can see, the title isn't even something that the study itself claims, but the title very much looks like it's making the assertion that it's a quote or claim directly from the study but it seems to be more the OPs interpretation, the title for that reason should be changed.
2. The excerpt that you picked out seems like it would have been far better to include in the OP and provide a lot more context and information around what the study is actually claiming and the point of the study.
3. The OP doesn't list anything about how the study is conducted, things that would be useful to include would be; The sample size of 396, the 8 questions asked and how the points on the graph are determined which is a 5-point scale format ranging from strong disagreement to strong agreement (Dark Blue = Strong Disagreement; Pale Blue = Moderate Disagreement; Grey = Neutral; Orange = Moderate Agreement; Red = Strong Agreement) and maybe the date of the study (2023) but that last one isn't that important.
Based on the questions alone though, I don't really think much of the study, a lot of the questions are things that I didn't need this study to tell me that left wingers are in strong agreement over, Lol. Using 8 questions, especially those questions, to come up with that title is flawed logic to me. I can easily come up with different questions that those who consider themselves left-wing would disagree over.
Last edited by Ryuu96 - on 11 July 2025
