Partisanship, Voting, and the Dopamine D2 Receptor Gene

Dawes, Christopher T.; Fowler, James H.

doi:10.1017/s002238160909094x

Cited by 103 publications

(62 citation statements)

References 71 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…15 More broadly, the notion of environment-specific effects suggests that the link between personality and attitudes is likely to be a function of features of political environments such as social networks that are of growing interest across the social sciences (see, e.g., Christakis and Fowler 2009;Heaney and McClurg 2009). Likewise, the role of individual-level genetic differences in explaining political opinions and behavior is an area of ongoing work (e.g., Alford, Funk, and Hibbing 2005;Dawes and Fowler 2009;Eaves and Hatemi 2008;Fowler, Baker, and Dawes 2008;Hatemi et al 2009;Hatemi et al 2007;Martin et al 1986;Settle, Dawes, and Fowler 2009). Although there may be more direct links between genetics and political outcomes, the notion that contexts provide meaning to political stimuli seems like a promising theoretical conduit for how individual-level genetic differences, which are correlated with dispositional traits, affect political attitudes and behavior.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Personality and Political Attitudes: Relationships across Issue Domains and Political Contexts

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Personality and Political Attitudes: Relationships across Issue Domains and Political Contexts

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Scholars have already begun discovering specific genes associated with political behavior, which may be the first few pieces in the puzzle to understanding the biology that underlies it. For example, two studies Dawes and Fowler 2008) recently identified variants of three genes that are positively correlated with voter turnout. The genes they studied are known to influence social behavior via the dopaminergic and serotonergic systems, suggesting that voting may, in fact, be a prosocial act.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Genetic Variation in Political Participation

2008

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

T he decision to vote has puzzled scholars for decades. Theoretical models predict little or no variation in participation in (Aldrich 1993;Downs 1957;Feddersen and Sandroni 2006;Riker and Ordeshook 1968). When one person votes, everyone with the same preferences benefits from the increased likelihood that their preferred outcome will result. Yet those who do vote must bear the cost of time and effort required to learn about election alternatives and go to the polls. In large populations, the probability that a single vote will change the outcome of an election is miniscule (Gelman, King, and Boscardin 1998), meaning that even very small costs to the individual typically outweigh the expected benefits he or she would receive from voting. As a result, classic game theoretic models that assume indi- viduals are self-interested and fully optimizing in their behavior show that the equilibrium amount of voter turnout approaches zero as the population becomes large (Palfrey and Rosenthal 1985). Yet in spite of this theoretical result, millions of people do vote, suggesting that something other than self-interest or optimizing behavior drives their decision (Bendor, Diermeier, and Ting 2003;Feddersen and Sandroni 2006;Fowler 2006b). In addition, the fact that millions of people abstain suggests that there may be inherent variation in the human tendency to participate in politics.Empirical models of turnout and political participation have tried to explain this variation using numerous covariates inspired by a vast literature (Plutzer 2002;Timpone 1998;Verba, Schlozman, and Brady 1995), including demographic factors like age (Strate et al.

show abstract

“…Since then, scholars have found that political attitudes related to vote choice are also heritable (Hatemi et al 2007) as is the strength of partisan attachment (Hatemi et al 2009a;Settle, Dawes, and Fowler 2009). Likewise, genetic variation is important for explaining variation in political behaviors that are known to be influenced by ideology, like voting and other forms of political participation (Fowler, Baker, and Dawes 2008;Dawes and Fowler 2009). These findings suggest that we should revise our environment-only understanding of political attitudes and ideology.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Friendships Moderate an Association Between a Dopamine Gene Variant and Political Ideology

et al. 2008

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scholars in many fields have long noted the importance of social context in the development of political ideology. Recent work suggests that political ideology also has a heritable component, but no specific gene variant or combination of variants associated with political ideology have so far been identified. Here, we hypothesize that individuals with a genetic predisposition toward seeking out new experiences will tend to be more liberal, but only if they are embedded in a social context that provides them with multiple points of view. Using data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, we test this hypothesis by investigating an association between self-reported political ideology and the 7R variant of the dopamine receptor D4 gene (DRD4), which has previously been associated with novelty seeking. Among those with DRD4-7R, we find that the number of friendships a person has in adolescence is significantly associated with liberal political ideology. Among those without the gene variant, there is no association. This is the first study to elaborate a specific gene-environment interaction that contributes to ideological self-identification, and it highlights the importance of incorporating both nature and nurture into the study of political preferences.In his influential collection of essays, Ideology and Utopia, Karl Mannheim (1936) sought to explain the meaning and origin of political ideology. As a founder of the "sociology of knowledge" school of thought, he broadened a view, first championed by Marx, that individual political attitudes are derived from groups and their relationships to the whole of society. While Marx focused particularly on class relations, Mannheim observed that political ideology is the product of the total social context of each individual. To understand a person's political ideology, we need only examine his or her political environment.Mannheim's work would influence several generations of scholars (e.g., Huntington 1957;Bell 1959;Rapoport 1974;North 1978;Lipset 1983;Jackman and Muha 1984;Haas 1992). While many of these scholars disagreed with parts of Mannheim's argument, they all agreed with the premise: that the social and institutional environment is paramount for explaining a person's political attitudes and beliefs. When individuals say they are "liberal" or "conservative," they are referring to their ideas about the issues of the day that are specific to a place and a moment in history. Remove them to another context and their ideology will change.This literature contrasts with a growing body of work that suggests ideology is not purely a product of the social environment or historical moment. Increasingly, it is becoming Contact author James Fowler, jhfowler@ucsd.edu. Most recent version available at http://jhfowler.ucsd.edu. NIH Public AccessAuthor Manuscript J Polit. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2012 January 24. NIH-PA Author ManuscriptNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript apparent that political ideology also has a "core" eleme...

show abstract

Partisanship, Voting, and the Dopamine D2 Receptor Gene

Cited by 103 publications

References 71 publications

Personality and Political Attitudes: Relationships across Issue Domains and Political Contexts

Personality and Political Attitudes: Relationships across Issue Domains and Political Contexts

Genetic Variation in Political Participation

Friendships Moderate an Association Between a Dopamine Gene Variant and Political Ideology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About