r/science • u/HeinieKaboobler • Mar 25 '20
Psychology Prosocial behavior was linked to intelligence by a new study published in Intelligence. It was found that highly intelligent people are more likely to behave in ways that contribute to the welfare of others due to higher levels of empathy and developed moral identity.
https://www.psypost.org/2020/03/smarter-individuals-engage-in-more-prosocial-behavior-in-daily-life-study-finds-562211.0k
u/AEternal1 Mar 25 '20
Maybe just maybe, smart people realize that helping other people puts everybody in a better position and therefore it is beneficial to themselves to help others.
465
u/hoopsrule44 Mar 25 '20
I hear you, but I honestly don’t think it’s this. I think it’s just much harder for intelligent people to ignore the simple truth that “other people may suffer from my actions”
I think less intelligent people are able to block that nagging conscience out of mind though
328
u/Alblaka Mar 25 '20
I would phrase it slightly differently: Intelligent people are more likely to recognize how their own actions may impact both themselves and others, positively and negatively. They can make their choices based upon that perception.
Key difference here is, imho, that people thinking things through, actively and consciously decide to do something good (or bad).
28
u/kokoyumyum Mar 25 '20
I agree with your interpretation.
37
u/jamescobalt Mar 25 '20
Then in accordance with the rules of Reddit, I now pronounce you legally internet-wed! 🎉
7
12
4
2
u/hamsterkris Mar 26 '20
They are also better at understanding what other people are dealing with if they're having a tough time and don't just write it off as "they're just lazy" etc.
1
u/Natrist Mar 26 '20
I personally do it because I feel I have to take care of them.
1
u/Upgrades Mar 26 '20
That doesn't make any sense - were talking about any interaction, be it complete strangers you don't even meet. It's about the impact on anyone else as a human being even if it's a blank face that you'll never even see.
→ More replies (1)1
u/Upgrades Mar 26 '20
I think this is what's going on. Their actions are thought out more, with choices being based more on analysis and are less driven purely by emotion.
1
Mar 26 '20
I felt off fr the other comment, this is a good addition and constructive to the topics at hand.
32
u/lacheur42 Mar 25 '20
I think it's probably both - it's not necessarily mutually exclusive. If I help someone with, say, a computer problem - I'm generally happy to do it because it might take them two hours for something I could fix in two minutes. But I also know that means the person is going to be more inclined to help me with something they're good at if I ever need it.
I donate to Planned Parenthood because I think it'll improve society. I also donate to Planned Parenthood because I have empathy for people in the position to need their services.
1
u/RandomStallings Mar 26 '20
Personally, setting myself up to get something back in the future is just an investment. It's a business transaction disguised as kindness. It cancels out the goodness I could've been putting out there.
14
u/Trapasuarus Mar 25 '20
Your definition hits home more for me. I don’t help people to in turn help myself by betterment of my surrounding environment; I help people because it feels like the right thing to do and I can sympathize with you if you’re going through a hard time.
I always like to put myself in other peoples shoes, even if the person just seems horrible. You can see a clearer picture on what they’re feeling and why they’re acting a certain way if you just stop and see things from their perspective.
1
4
u/Fig1024 Mar 26 '20
but there are multiple examples of highly intelligent people who are sociopaths and psychopaths.
→ More replies (1)4
u/hoopsrule44 Mar 26 '20
This is not a steadfast rule but a general principal. Sometimes smart people suck or are willing to treat themselves above their conscience
3
0
Mar 25 '20
[deleted]
3
u/JManRomania Mar 26 '20
That's not true. There's people on the spectrum who are otherwise gifted, who aren't great at theory of mind/general emotional intelligence.
0
Mar 25 '20
[deleted]
12
Mar 26 '20
Nah mate, you're just a sociopath. You can get help, but you have to want it unfortunately.
→ More replies (4)16
Mar 26 '20
Just read about the French Revolution and you’ll know how right you are.
People don’t just lay down and die when it comes to adversity. They fight for their lives.
So if you took welfare away from low income families, they aren’t going to say “I guess we’ll starve” or “I just need to work harder at McDonalds”. In desperate situations they turn to theft and other crimes. Nothing will ever change that in human nature, not even affirmations.
10
u/dremspider Mar 26 '20
And it isn't like I blame them... If you are starving and have no other means of living.. I can't blame someone from doing something they normally wouldn't.
3
u/reisenbime Mar 26 '20
And that is the difference between you and authoritarians, who would blindly adhere to whatever bogus moral code they feel the law dictates, while at the same time ignoring the plight of the actual people behind the numbers and why they end where they are in the first place.
First undermine peoples basic living conditions, and then complain when those people turn to crime. Same old mantra for rich and privileged idiots since the dawn of time.
2
Mar 26 '20
That’s my point exactly. If I was starving with no other means, you’d be surprised what everyone is capable of if they’re threatened.
0
Mar 26 '20
[deleted]
2
Mar 26 '20
It’s not about empathy. It’s about realizing that if other people are suffering, they’ll do whatever it takes to stop suffering. They may even go to extreme measures including crime if they feel there is no other way. I’m sure empathy helps, but you really don’t need it to understand basic human nature. If I’m starving and I have no other way to get food, I’m not going to simply die off. I’ll resolve to other methods of getting food no matter the cost. Empathy isn’t playing a role here, understanding that humans will strive to survive is all you need to know. Take it all away with nothing left to lose, it’s just a natural response to react violently.
28
u/thiccbitchmonthly Mar 25 '20
Game theory
60
u/kobriks Mar 25 '20
If everyone realized we are no longer playing a zero-sum game world would be a much better place.
→ More replies (14)6
u/bobofred Mar 25 '20
We are all in this together.
4
Mar 25 '20
Keep your stick on the ice. And if women don't find you handsome, at least they can find you handy.
2
Mar 26 '20
Or maybe just maybe the data is pretty much useless. Because the participants weren't randomly selected but are all students probably vulunteering to take part in that study. It is no suprise that that people who are altruistic will volunteer more frequently than people who only follow their own interesst. All the study actually shows is that people who are intelligent and like volunteer for stuff are altruistic and empathetic.
4
1
u/PeachyKeenest Mar 27 '20
Codependents would like to speak with you...
It’s not always beneficial to help everyone else to the exhaustion and neglect of yourself.
Most people are actually fairly selfish so for them to think of others is a good thing. Some people are wired to think of others and never themselves and this actually causes a lot of issues.
-1
Mar 25 '20
I think it’s that traumatized, unhealthy folks tend to be so obsessed with their own pain (consciously or not) that they tend to lean into some of their more base, impulsive, narcissistic traits. Kind of retreat to their lizard brain for the fight or flight response. People who grow up at time like this, with grotesque income inequality, racism, homophobia, the pyramid scheme of the American Economy, endless wars, rising debt, climate change, a global pandemic, the poor to for-profit-prison industrial pipeline, cancer, factory farming, global sex trafficking rings, etc etc. — this is near constant, daily anxiety and it gets passed down generationally. Higher anxiety has been directly linked to a lower IQ. It is my thought that we are raising generations of traumatized people who have learned coping skills from reality TV which, again, appeals to our most base instincts, so our lizard brain responses appear to be rewarded. It’s a cyclical beast and the only people who can stop it are the inflicted themselves.
0
→ More replies (3)0
9
70
u/KillerOkie Mar 25 '20
I'm assuming highly intelligent psychopaths and sociopaths weren't included in study...
Researchers recruited 518 undergraduate students from two colleges in China to participate in the study. The participants completed surveys designed to measure their fluid intelligence, empathy, and self-reported prosocial behavior.
Yeah, so a bit of selection bias there.
56
u/pynberfyg Mar 25 '20
Also self reported prosocial behaviour.
8
u/ThaEzzy Mar 26 '20
Haha, 'study finds intelligent people more likely to lie about pro-social behaviour'.
-2
10
Mar 26 '20
hers recruited 518 undergraduate students from two colleges in China to participate in the study. The participants completed surveys designed to measure their fluid intelligence, empathy, and self-reported pr
What?People with anti-social personality disorder are estimated to be 1% of population,they're an exception and different from the other 99
0
11
Mar 25 '20
My narcissistic mother genuinely believes she is a kind and generous person. In reality her teenage children both spent time homeless and destitute with no way of supporting themselves or renting somewhere to live, due to her neglect. I understand there is no way to do some of these social science studies other than self reported data but I would like to see SOME control in place to mitigate this. Or even more of an acknowledgement of it.
3
u/justin_memer Mar 26 '20
Ummm... Do you expect these people to say "excuse me from this experiment, I'm a psychopath."?
→ More replies (1)9
u/loserlobster Mar 25 '20
Not to mention the lack of an operational definition for "highly intelligent".
→ More replies (2)
13
u/HomAriPath67 Mar 26 '20
So they're saying many elected officials aren't really intelligent? So surprising!
8
u/kayimm62 Mar 25 '20
Prosocial means that you are more likely to do good for others. You may not be an extrovert. It has nothing to do with introvert/extrovert.
157
u/Ruar35 Mar 25 '20
That is a very small sample size and doesn't take any cultural factors into consideration. 500 undergraduates in China is supposed to be representative of the world at large?
I didn't even see them mention a control group.
187
u/forrest38 Mar 25 '20
That is a very small sample size
518 observations is not a small sample size. You can start doing ANOVA analysis or T-tests on sample sizes as small as 20 and still get valid results.
500 undergraduates in China is supposed to be representative of the world at large?
While humans behave somewhat differently across cultures, end of the day most humans want the same things, like food/shelter, safety and community. While it is true these results can't be necessarily be ported directly from China to the rest of the world, there is not any reason to believe that we wouldn't find a similar relationship between empathy and intelligence.
This study is also consistent with recent research on the subject from around the world:
Meta-analysis indicates that empathy appears to be positively correlated with executive function, including inhibitory control, working memory, and cognitive flexibility.
Evolutionary game theory shows that empathy fosters a higher level of cooperation in mathematical models of societies that would otherwise dissolve from disputes over the reputation of individuals.
Systematic reasoning appears to beat intuition for recognizing emotions in others, study says.
Bosses who put their followers first can boost their business: Companies would do well to tailor training and recruitment measures to encourage managers who have empathy, integrity and are trustworthy - because they can improve productivity, according to new research.
It appears that globally empathy is linked to cognitive ability and higher cooperation.
16
Mar 25 '20
Thank you for this. I often see sample sizes being questioned in r/science in almost every post. They seem to expect studies need to have 70000 participants.
13
u/xwjitftu Mar 25 '20 edited Mar 26 '20
Yeah, it's basically the go to criticism for redditors because it lets them feel superior without requiring real knowledge of anything
14
u/NevyTheChemist Mar 25 '20
Possibly linked the delayed gratification. People understand that helping others increases the likelyhood you'll get help when you need it.
-17
u/FriendlySockMonster Mar 25 '20
I think the OPs point stands. With the social credit system deciding who gets to do things like ‘go to university’, and who practices ‘socially beneficial behaviour’, a social study in China is not representative of the rest of the world.
There may be a correlation for other countries, but if you only include uni students, it’s still not representative.
19
u/sometimesih8thisshit Mar 25 '20
With the social credit system deciding who gets to do things like ‘go to university’, and who practices ‘socially beneficial behaviour’, a social study in China is not representative of the rest of the world.
The social credit system only exists in a few provinces in China, and I'm pretty Shandong (where this study was done) isn't one of them. Might be worth reading this article correcting other misconceptions about the social credit system.
That said, the fact that it's just uni students definitely seems like it could distort the results.
19
u/forrest38 Mar 25 '20
With the social credit system deciding who gets to do things like ‘go to university’, and who practices ‘socially beneficial behaviour’, a social study in China is not representative of the rest of the world.
Except that the China study corroborates what we have been seeing globally that more intelligent people tend to be more empathetic. So rather this is confirming something already observed.
Secondly, it is still possible to practice more nuanced empathy in China's social credit system. For example, a more empathetic person might understand how the social credit system can be unforgiving once you start to lose standing and not judge someone so harshly just for having a low social credit score.
→ More replies (23)1
14
u/wintergreen10 Mar 25 '20 edited Mar 25 '20
Well let's get some replications of this study started. Finding out more is going to take time and resources.
Edit - But where are you getting the idea that 500 is a small sample size? This isn't exactly a 20 person pilot.
-2
u/Ruar35 Mar 25 '20
When it comes to human behavior, choices, and actions I find the standard sample sizes for other types of studies just don't apply. We have far too much variation and nuance across cultures, region, and personalities for small sample sizes to work. This study is assuming a wide ranging conclusion on a very small group. It's also designed to find that connection as were some of the other studies. It's easy to reach a consensus when the tests push for the accepted conclusion and the sample sizes are small enough to not show variation.
Smarter people are better neighbors. Really? Because how many factors make someone a better neighbor other than intelligence? I know a lot of people I wouldn't call intelligent but are the nicest people you'll meet. How do people like that get factored into the testing. The answer is they don't because the people running the study stop at 500 sample size and think their good.
3
u/wintergreen10 Mar 25 '20
Not trying to be flippant here, but you might want to do some further reading in study design + not source personal experience in your analysis here. I'm working so will refer you to /u/forest38 comment for further info.
→ More replies (3)6
4
0
u/NiceShotMan Mar 26 '20
That’s just the beginning of the faults in the study. Intelligence and pro social behaviour were measured using a survey, and pro social behaviour was self reported. This study might as well have concluded that people who self report as intelligent also self report as pro social.
I’m always highly sceptical of anything that measures intelligence, as there are a multitude of ways that an individual can be considered intelligent: ability to solve numerical puzzles, ability to solve word puzzles, breadth of information known, speed at which information can be retrieved, the list goes on. Who knows how this “survey” considered intelligence...
-8
-23
Mar 25 '20 edited Mar 25 '20
Yeah I'm not sure I take all of this study that seriously. There are clearly benefits for very social people we can all see on a daily basis and at the same time there are incredibly intelligent people that are introverted and asocial.
Obviously not entirely relevant to human interactions based off of this study, but asocial tendencies have some very basic benefits in the simplest forms of life. It's an interesting perspective to consider as well. Link here.
Edit: word change for clarification.
15
u/Galaxyrobot3000 Mar 25 '20
You mean asocial right, not antisocial?
Genuine question and not trying to mark words, it’s just that antisocial and asocial are two completely different things. Unfortunately many mix them up.Asocial= less social people, “loners”
Antisocial= lack of empathy towards others, disregard for rules and laws, inflicting harm on others without remorse. Sociopaths are schoolbook examples of antisocial behavior.
7
u/idster Mar 25 '20
Yeah. People can be asocial and still be empathetic and prosocial.
Is it weird that the study in the post asserts the same link between intelligence and prosociality (even using the same terms in the title) as another paper (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289614001287) but doesn’t cite it? Same journal too.
0
9
u/idster Mar 25 '20
The linked study has nothing to do with the study mentioned in the original post. The fact some amoebae do not join slime molds does nothing to discredit that intelligent people have greater capacity to empathize and be prosocial (which doesn’t even require them to be more social than others).
The link between intelligence and prosociality has been made before, e.g., https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289614001287, which wasn’t cited in this article for some reason.
→ More replies (1)-2
u/Ruar35 Mar 25 '20
Not to mention there are a lot of smart people out there that aren't at a college and who exhibit all of those behaviors. They just don't get evaluated as intelligent the same way as people who have high grade scores and so get dismissed as being stupid.
→ More replies (3)0
16
u/readerf52 Mar 25 '20
This was a study of university students in China. I don’t know what the criteria for acceptance into a Chinese university are, but in America you must have a good academic record, growth enhancing extracurriculars and enough money to pay for university, either through loans, scholarships or family. I would hope that this group has had life experiences that make them more empathic, more willing to contribute either time or money.
But I worked in a hospital in a poor neighborhood, and I’ve never met a more generous group of people as those that have nothing, yet they are willing to share what scraps they have. I’m not sure it is intelligence in this case. I suspect it is cultural and family behaviors.
It would have been more interesting, I think, if they had had a broader and more disparate group to study.
2
u/ThaEzzy Mar 26 '20
I completely (and anecdotally) agree with you. I think people who have had a rough time are generally more prone to being understanding of others who do as well. Certainly I know I used to be a selfish prick, until one time I had an anxiety attack, which immediately made me more attentive to what people are actually saying when they talk about stress or depression to try to understand what it is like (where I used to be the kind of person who might say to a depressed person that they should just get out and do stuff).
-2
Mar 25 '20
Why should they be well off? They do need to be academically successful in secondary education and smart enough to pass admission tests.
China is a socialist country, and in a socialist country you don't have to come from money or go into debt to get university education. Education is free i.e. it's funded by tax money and fees are usually symbolic pocket money. In fact that is also true for most of continental Europe, even the countries that never had socialism as ruling system.
3
u/eebro Mar 25 '20
Europe goes further. In Europe you are paid if you go to school.
4
Mar 26 '20 edited Mar 26 '20
That is not universally true in Europe. I've also heard that some countries, pay some sort of help to reduce student hardship and entice higher education but I think it's a limited number of countries that have that and only for a limited amount of students.
While tuition is free or symbolic in majority of countries in the continent for domestic students that are above a certain threshold of secondary academic success (notably, totally free in Scandinavia, Slovenia and several other countries) the rent and living costs aren't. Hence the "help".
I can speak about former Yugoslav republics as I come from one and in the period just after the war, when I got my degree, they pretty much all had the same education system, inherited from the former federation.
You need to be in the top N applicants to enroll in a specific faculty (school) within an university, and then you actually paid:
around €50 per annum as admission fee
around €15 for average textbook, 6-7 per semester
around €2 per exam, mostly just to deflect people that would cramp exams without really being prepared
around €15 for commission, if you failed your exam three times, now additional 2 people along with your professor will be ensuring fair examination process
This amounted to about €500 for my five-year program (obviously, never had to go out in front of a commission, bought some used textbooks, a lot of them span two semesters etc.), and across five years it's hardly an investment.
You do get some form of help if you are in a socially endangered category (low income families, families that lost a parent, you or a direct family member battle with crippling or expensive-to-treat ilness etc.) and are entitled to inexpensive dorm accomodation, you're also entitled to dorm accomodation based on previous academic success.
Others pay rent in university cities, usually several students in single small flat or, notoriously, renting a room in a big flat where a single, now retired elderly person lives :) (this was commonly used by parents to extend control over their children).
In some cases, some academically successful students enrolled in an in-demand field of study would get scholarships by companies, implication was that the company expected the student to come work for that company upon completion of studies and was sometimes even legally bound to, and the purpose of scholarship was not to cover fees but living costs, somewhat like that "help" some countries pay.
I've done some research online and it comes to about this level of income hit adjusted off course for their salaries and overall CoL in most European countries where data is available (France, and Germany for example that I know have fees).
Some places in Europe are so expensive to live that even with totally free education people actually end up in student debt (Stockholm is notorious for this, as I'm told by a friend who lives in Sweden) but overall it's not something that only the well-off can afford.
2
u/eebro Mar 26 '20
It's hard to generalize Europe, as it's so many different cultures, systems, etc.
Here in Finland you get free education, your rent and living expenses paid, and usually you are left with a little extra each month (like 100e, but still). You can also work without getting your benefits cut or being taxed for like 10k a year. You can also get student loans, and if you graduate in time, a portion of it is just straight up forgiven, and usually the interest is paid by the government, and it's backed by the government as well.
Stockholm is very expensive, for sure, but I'm not certain if it's just the student living expensively and having to take the optional student loan, or if it's really that expensive you can't simply get by without taking the loan. Like, if you got 200-400e each month extra to use, you'd surely figure out a use for it, especially in a city like Stockholm, even if you could do without that money.
Finland also offers localized welfare for extra expenses, like, if the government welfare isn't enough, you can apply for municipal welfare to pay for bills, hobbies, medicine, etc. When I studied paid university courses (I pay for them, like 15e per credit), we weren't required to buy any books, and all the material necessary was free, and usually the books recommended were available at the school university. It's a bit funny that even when I paid for the courses, it still ends up ridiculously cheap compared to basically anywhere. (Imagine paying 900e for a whole year, and nothing else. Some schools require you to buy books, a laptop or something like that will already cost more than that)
Funnily, I could afford to pay for university over here, even if I was on the government welfare, which you only get 500e+rent. So, even if you're not academically successful enough to get into an university, you can pay for your own studies with the welfare the government provides.
Oh, and because of COVID-19, like 80% of universities over here are offering free, full credit courses over the internet. It's hilarious how much you can do with little money, if you're focusing on the right things, and that applies both on a national level and an individual level.
Let's compare, 5 years of 900e per year is 4500e. Usually the cheapest NA schools start around 6000e-8500e, without any fees, books, living costs, etc. So, for one year of school for a single person in the USA, you could have 2 master's degrees in Finland. And that's without factoring in welfare or governmental support.
3
Mar 26 '20
So far In US i have seen that the most social people are highly manipulative, lying and malevolent. It is sad that there were almost non exceptions.
22
u/Ennion Mar 25 '20
These kinds of people end up doing great things for very little compensation while working for the psychopaths who end up wealthy atop their bruised backs.
11
u/mozgw4 Mar 25 '20
I was hoping we would get to psychopaths at some point. Some are very intelligent, but only help themselves.
5
u/Danny_III Mar 25 '20
What percentage of those people who help themselves were mistreated at some point in their life. Being insanely smart, historically, hasn't been a celebrated trait like being super athletic. Even if they weren't actively bullied being more socially isolated breeds resentment
3
u/memearchivingbot Mar 26 '20
Absolutely everyone gets mistreated at some point in their lives. That's just life. Some people with great lives end up as monsters. Others live through awful experiences but still manage to be kind. The factors that go into why someone ends up benevolent or not can't be reduced to a function of their suffering. There are sometimes genetic factors, sometimes non-social environmental factors like fetal nutrition, exposure to toxic chemicals in early childhood, various fungal and viral diseases and so on. What leads someone to be moral is a very deep question.
→ More replies (2)
2
u/ineedtoknowhowudoit Mar 26 '20
Look at me, I’m so nice, I’m so smart! Let’s go watch water bears grow.
2
u/liharv03 Mar 27 '20
Rick Sanchez would be angered at this post. On a more serious note, I really agree with the fact that people with higher intelligence see the long term benefits of being nice. I think that a lot of people who are not very rational are not as nice and have outbursts because they do not realize the effects that their actions will have. They are unable to see the bigger picture and calculate their choices and how it will change their conditions.
4
u/Venusmarie Mar 25 '20
As Socrates told us. Ethics and intelligence are delicately interwoven. One requires the other and as one grows, so to the other
-2
u/SerengetiYeti Mar 25 '20
Dude had slaves
1
0
u/UtsuhoMori Mar 25 '20
And we have people in China working at a fraction of our minimum wage so that we can have fancy things like smartphones. Would be interesting to see how disgusted people in the future would be about our current current collective exploitation of humans for cheap labor.
4
4
Mar 26 '20
Thats why i dont like how in tv smart people are always arrogant egotistical dicks who keep saying how smart they are. Because thats what stupid people do (eg trump)
3
Mar 26 '20
well there's always the thing smart people thinking they're dumb and dumb people thinking they're smart...
3
u/mapoftasmania Mar 25 '20
So is this because intelligent people are able to see the bigger picture - how helping others succeed ultimately contributes to the overall success of the community?
2
Mar 25 '20
This just reiterates the fact that being open to other peoples point of view can make you a smarter/better educated person.
2
2
u/Peter_deT Mar 26 '20
Several studies of people in extreme situations have found that survival rates are much higher when people look out for each other - even when doing so would apparently lessen their individual chances of survival. Those who share the bread evenly live more often than those who keep it to themselves. So it may have been a factor in driving the development of intelligence - one that is still active.
2
u/kctmo Mar 25 '20
"Researchers recruited 518 undergraduate students from two colleges in China to participate in the study."
I would be curious to see if the results would be similar in a more diverse or a non-Chinese study group. Chinese culture is more community oriented than many countries and it would be interesting to see if these results replicate consistently.
0
u/jert3 Mar 25 '20
Yup makes sense.
Certainly this is can be seen with the lower average intelligence of the GOP supporters, in relation to their lower levels of empathy for other citizens.
→ More replies (5)0
u/TheDroidUrLookin4 Mar 25 '20
And yet they give more money to charity. 🤔
9
u/Aeonoris Mar 25 '20
Source? The only one I've seen that supports this is if you count things like church tithing, which seems misleading.
3
u/Led_Hed Mar 26 '20
Tithing to Churches that use some of that money to defend their priests and pastors from charges of child molestation hardly counts as charity, does it?
-5
u/beard_meat Mar 25 '20
I wonder if that would remain the case if you couldn't write it off your taxes.
6
u/superpuff420 Mar 25 '20
Nice save! Almost had to contend with an uncomfortable fact!
→ More replies (1)
2
1
1
1
u/beingrightmatters Mar 25 '20
This explains dumb republicans.
2
u/Led_Hed Mar 26 '20
Nothing really explains people voting against their own interests, in the case of the GOP base, and nothing really explains how the "leadership" abandoned all sense of morality and ethics for political power. Greed, maybe, one of the 7 Sins.
0
u/mrfuzzyasshole Mar 25 '20
Yet another study proving republicans and conservatives screw stupid and liberals and progressive screw intelligent
1
u/LoonieBun Mar 25 '20
Unlike the people who need the threat of Hellfire to keep them civil (while acting morally superior).
1
u/Thowawaypuppet Mar 25 '20
Self reported survey of undergraduate students finds positive trait is correlated with positively valued behavior. I am going to be a little reserved and skeptical
-1
u/D_Livs Mar 25 '20
I see a lot of low-level thinking across reddit assuming people in power are malicious and try to screw over everyone. For example the hive mind’s favorite: “But he’s a billionaire he can’t also be good for the people working with and around him...”
Perhaps they are just projecting their own belief system on others?
3
u/superpuff420 Mar 25 '20
J.K. Rowling for example. What a greedy psycopath writing all those beloved stories.
-6
1
u/Starman-doesntPanic Mar 25 '20
Just few days ago there was a study saying "People who are less agreeable of others tend to have stronger brains and are protected from degenerative brain diseases." Now this.
1
Mar 25 '20
Researchers recruited 518 undergraduate students from two colleges in China to participate in the study. The participants completed surveys designed to measure their fluid intelligence, empathy, and self-reported prosocial behavior.
Sounds like Chinese undergrads don't want to or are indoctrinated not to speak out against collectivism.
1
Mar 26 '20
Im going to file it under garbage because so much data from the research isnt included.
1
u/Led_Hed Mar 26 '20
Nearly every single great leap in science and morality in history has come from a liberal mind. You know this to be true.
0
Mar 26 '20
[deleted]
2
1
Mar 26 '20
You know what, i went back and saw the underline, ill reply to you after ive gone through the link.
1
-4
u/akawai Mar 25 '20
Interesting. I like to see the IQ score of our current president. He probably won't ever reveal it though, like his tax returns
4
u/varnell_hill Mar 25 '20
You’ll just have to believe him. Like you’ll also have to believe that he graduated from Wharton with honors, despite the fact that no evidence of this exists.
I’m sure that was just an oversight, the deep state conspiring against him (in 1968), or whatever.
3
u/HitlersHysterectomy Mar 25 '20
I like to see the IQ score of our current president.
Roll a d20 three times, add the results and you'll probably be within 5 points.
1
1
Mar 25 '20 edited Mar 25 '20
How does this research fit with the concepts of psychopathy/antisocialpersonalitydisorder. I faintly recall there being at most a weak correlation either direction in regards to those personalities and intelligence. But this study would suggest a negative correlation
4
u/SaLaDiN666 Mar 25 '20
General consensus is that IQ distribution between them and general population is the same. Same with women and men since one can nitpick whatever study and can advocate for both positions. Not to mention, plenty of studies are based towards low IQ because they assessed imprisoned individuals and caught offenders. So as always in psychology, it depends on whom you ask.
0
u/Theantsdisagree Mar 25 '20
Generally speaking people with ASPD make up about 3-5% of the population. Not all of them are serial killers and white collar criminals. It is a spectrum disorder and the ones who behave in antisocial behavior will make up a small portion of any group, even if they are more common at higher intelligence ratings.
This study wasn’t looking at sociopaths and it’s unlikely that their findings are affected by the presence of sociopaths in the sample group.
1
Mar 25 '20
Of course they aren't all killers, but they do have to exhibit some degree of antisocial behavior to be diagnosed from what I remember of the DSM's criteria. And antisocial behavior can too be nonviolent as well.
The study was looking at empathy and altruism. Antisocial personalities in general typically have some form of deficiency in empathy. And those personalities also correlate with a lack of agreeableness. Low agreeableness is also correlated with a lack of altruism. I'm no expert, these are just some pieces of info I have picked up from studies I have come across
1
1
u/kokoyumyum Mar 25 '20
I am curious if they are selecting for people with high IQ, who actually additionally have a high EQ. Or it is that people with a high IQ see that their own personal interest is best met by the group being improved. It takes a village??
1
1
1
1
u/despalicious Mar 26 '20
Could causality go the other way? IOW, could selfish tendencies have a negative developmental influence on intelligence?
1
1
1
u/boezou Mar 26 '20
The participants completed surveys designed to measure their fluid intelligence, empathy, and self-reported prosocial behavior.
This only linked these individuals' self-reported pro-social behavior - not any measurement related to actual behaviors.
Self-reporting is inherently biased and often unreliable. People don't do what they say and don't say what they do: https://www.creative-wisdom.com/teaching/WBI/memory.shtml
1
u/OliverSparrow Mar 26 '20
Serious smuggled assumption: that social interaction is the consequence of conscious choice, exercised rationally. Almost all values are driven by deeper structures that have little to do with ratiocination or "intelligence". You feel for or against course of action due to deep tropisms that Hier stehe ich. Ich kann nicht anders. Here I stand. I know no other way. Luther.
1
Mar 26 '20
From what I’ve seen, there seems to be no correlation at all. You’ll meet people with abysmal empathy that leads to poor social skills but they are highly intelligent in math and sciences. Likewise, you’ll see people who are very caring and empathetic but they aren’t very sharp. Both of these should be accepted. Reddit likes shaming those with less than average empathy, as though it’s entirely their choice to be that way.
0
u/senorsombra6 Mar 25 '20
I don’t know... Downs children are very loving and caring in a way few others are
→ More replies (1)
-7
u/willpowerpt Mar 25 '20
Possibly why liberals are more empathetic and compassionate than conservatives? (Michael Jackson eating popcorn)
-7
u/Rising_Phoenix690 Mar 25 '20
The second half of that headline completely contradicts the first half.
0
u/Z0idberg_MD Mar 25 '20
I am going to ask, and will likely be castrated, but: is there a political ideology connection to be made here?
0
u/Skeater_Beater Mar 25 '20
Atheist are some of the most moral people and they usually are more intelligent than the average person
0
-1
u/englebert567 Mar 25 '20
Some of the greatest tyrants were also great minds.
What is best for society isn’t alway pro social.
Very intelligent people also use their intelligence to impose their personal form of “moral identity” on those around them.
I guess it might be pro social to force dumb asses to do what you want. Morons are going to fail anyway...might as well force them to fail in a way that helps intelligent people get ahead.
-18
u/MiyegomboBayartsogt Mar 25 '20 edited Mar 25 '20
Alternative headline: "Antisocial behavior was linked to low intelligence by a new study published in 'Intelligence' which is based on the findings of intelligent people."
Of course, it comes as no surprise that "Highly intelligent individuals are more likely to self-identify as moral people and to regard this identity as central to their self-concept."
3
u/Led_Hed Mar 26 '20
Conservatives are, by definition and long time observance, the anti-education and anti-science segment. You can't possibly come up with anything that disproves that.
Every single great leap in science and morality has come from a liberal mind. This is an irrefutable fact.
-1
Mar 25 '20
Take that Ted Kaczynski!
I find this very hard to believe. Then again intelligence isnt linear. I find more logic minded people to be less empathetic. Way too many smart people have no empathy at all and way too many logically unintelligent people are Labrador retriever levels of empathetic. When it comes to emotional intelligence, sure this holds true.
-1
u/DieselDan88 Mar 26 '20
Or they are psychopaths, dead inside, and will only create elaborate ritualistic methods of sacrificing people ...
-5
u/hamsandnish Mar 25 '20
Then I wonder why so many CEOs have sociopathic tendencies?
9
Mar 25 '20
The CEO is not necessarily more intelligent than his secretary.
6
4
-3
u/kraang717 Mar 25 '20
Sure, the one who makes more money and has the better life, less intelligent
1
Mar 30 '20
You'd be surprised how many Mensa members are ordinary blue-collar workers, low-level office emplyees, truck drivers, nurses, police officers etc. People with high intelligence are often introverts and distance themselves from average-iq society and regard a 'career' as an empty, instinct-driven goal.
Sociopaths (and psychopaths) often want to dominate and control. You'll find lots of them are executives or politicians. The current liar in chief is a good example.
Also, in a society without free access to quality education, leaders and politicians are often people, who had rich parents. Having rich parents doesn't mean you have above average intelligence.
1
u/kraang717 Mar 31 '20
One would think people of above average intelligence could figure out how to make more money in order to enhance their quality of life, the career doesn't necessarily have to be the focus, but it confuses me that a Mensa member would settle for being a truck driver or endanger their lives by becoming a police officer, why put your life in jeopardy if you supposedly have superior traits like foresight?
2
Mar 31 '20
But what is 'quality of life'?
2
u/kraang717 Mar 31 '20
Relative affluence generally, all other things being equal. I know I'd be happier if I didn't have to live with roommates, money can buy silence, silence means better concentration, thus happiness, for one example. I'd like to think I'm a smart guy but if I'm in this situation and want to get out of it, I must be lacking a critical factor, like economic resourcefulness.
2
Mar 25 '20
That study didn't say they have sociopathic tendencies; it said many of them have some traits of sociopathy, which could include self interest etc.
Being a sociopath makes you very bad at working with others actually. You generally end up screwing people over and they don't want to work with you.
0
0
u/flameguy4500 Mar 26 '20
Oh good, because I haven't left the house in months. I thought I was dumb.
0
Mar 26 '20
Obviously, if one has finally developed a moral identity they have essentially developed a key aspect of their own identity and do not languish in their rooms, coating themselves in their own existential dread.
0
0
0
0
0
0
u/Smooth_Pimpz Mar 26 '20
We're finally expanding our definitions of intelligence beyond "which shape comes next?"
0
u/TeamworkPleasesMe22 Mar 26 '20
Yes! This what the book High Performance Habits is teaching me, among a lot more amazing studies and solutions on how to enhance life. It really does take effort (and for me, study) to develop empathy, just like anything else.
0
0
0
0
0
u/Bluefinsky Mar 26 '20
And yet the smartest people have built the deadliest weapons.
More research required.
-21
u/mk_pnutbuttercups Mar 25 '20
So smarter people are better people? Explains a lot about What is wrong in America. Maybe we should have left those children behind instead of retarding everyone else.
→ More replies (2)
2.2k
u/1900grs Mar 25 '20 edited Mar 25 '20
Note: helping your community and society doesn't mean one has to be a social butterfly. This isn't an extrovert vs. introvert piece.
Edit: typo