Cognitive ability is a powerful predictor of political tolerance

Abstract

Objectives Despite the broad appeal of abstract notions of political tolerance, people vary in the degree to which they support the political rights of groups they dislike. Prior research highlighted the relevance of individual differences in the cognitive domain, claiming the application of general tolerance ideals to specific situations is a cognitively demanding task. Curiously, this work has overwhelmingly focused on differences in cognitive style, largely neglecting differences in cognitive ability, despite compelling conceptual linkages. We remedy this shortcoming. Methods We explore diverse predictors of tolerance using survey data in two large samples from Denmark (N = 805) and the United States (N = 1,603). Results Cognitive ability was the single strongest predictor of political tolerance, with larger effects than education, openness to experience, ideology, and threat. The cognitively demanding nature of tolerance judgments was further supported by results showing cognitive ability predicted tolerance best when extending such tolerance was hardest. Additional small‐sample panel results demonstrated substantial 4‐year stability of political tolerance, informing future work on the origins of political tolerance. Conclusions Our observation of a potent role for cognitive ability in tolerance supports cognitively oriented accounts of tolerance judgments and highlights the need for further exploration of cognitive ability within the political domain.

Assessing the Robustness of the Relationship between Tolerance and Intelligence

“…Both relationships have been consistently replicated over the last few decades (Bobo & Licari, 1989;Rasmussen & Ludeke, 2021;Rindermann, 2008). For example, Meeusen et al (2013) utilized the Netherlands Longitudinal Lifecourse Study (NELLS) to fit a structural equation model relating education to ethnocentrism with intelligence, occupational status, financial problems, intergroup friendship, and intergroup contact as mediators.…”

“…Intelligence 2 research has consistently supported the idea that more intelligent (Carl, 2014;Deary et al, 2008;De keersmaecker et al, 2021;Hodson & Busseri, 2012;Kemmelmeier, 2008Kutner & Gordon, 1964Schoon et al, 2010;Van Hiel et al, 2010;Meeusen et al, 2013;Onraet et al, 2015;Rasmussen & Ludeke, 2021) and educated (Bobo & Licari, 1989;Sidanius & Lau, 1989;Kemmelmeier, 2008;Schoon et al, 2010;Van Hiel et al, 2010;Meeusen et al, 2013) individuals tend to be more tolerant (cf. Brandt & Crawford, 2016;Ganzach & Schul, 2021;Wodtke, 2016).…”

“…Brandt & Crawford, 2016;Ganzach & Schul, 2021;Wodtke, 2016). These relationships are situated within a nomothetic web of other concepts connecting intelligence, education, support for freedom of speech, reduced levels of prejudice, stalwartly democratic values, reduced feelings of threat from outgroups, lower levels of dogmatism, and higher openness to experience (Rasmussen & Ludeke, 2021).…”