Plenty of proof of that on here, so many to choose from!
https://nypost.com/2016/06/09/scienc...chotic-traits/
Someone already pulled this same bullshit. Shame on you assholes, for your belittling of the mental community, by insinuating people with different opinions have mental illness. Complacency isn't mental illness. Stupidity isn't mental illness. Rebellious angst isn't mental illness. Political opinion isn't mental illness. You get those all over, and some have become stagnant on the right, because of Trump. Politics is just a sickness, so grow up.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Post
The New York Post is a daily newspaper in New York City. The Post also operates the celebrity gossip site PageSix.com, the entertainment site Decider.com, and co-produces the television show Page Six TV.
The modern version of the paper is published in tabloid format. Established in 1801 by federalist and Founding Father Alexander Hamilton, it became a respected broadsheet in the 19th century, under the name New York Evening Post.
In 1976, Rupert Murdoch bought the Post for US$30.5 million.[3] Since 1993, the Post has been owned by News Corporation and its successor, News Corp, which had owned it previously from 1976 to 1988. Its editorial offices are located at 1211 Avenue of the Americas (Sixth Avenue). Its distribution ranked 7th in the US in 2002.
right wing fucking trash
cancel2 2022 (10-16-2018), tinfoil (10-16-2018)
Right Wing nutjob's New York Post???
well alrighty then!
It is quoting the American Journal of Political Science, dopey fucking twat!! In fact, the article is talking exactly about braindead psychotics like you.
Turns out liberals are the real authoritarians.
A political-science journal that published an oft-cited study claiming conservatives were more likely to show traits associated with “psychoticism” now says it got it wrong. Very wrong.
The American Journal of Political Science published a correction this year saying that the 2012 paper has “an error” — and that liberal political beliefs, not conservative ones, are actually linked to psychoticism.
“The interpretation of the coding of the political attitude items in the descriptive and preliminary analyses portion of the manuscript was exactly reversed,” the journal said in the startling correction.
“The descriptive analyses report that those higher in Eysenck’s psychoticism are more conservative, but they are actually more liberal; and where the original manuscript reports those higher in neuroticism and social desirability are more liberal, they are, in fact, more conservative.”
In the paper, psychoticism is associated with traits such as tough-mindedness, risk-taking, sensation-seeking, impulsivity and authoritarianism.
The social-desirability scale measures people’s tendency to answer questions in ways they believe would please researchers, even if it means overestimating their positive characteristics and underestimating negative ones.
The erroneous report has been cited 45 times, according to Thomson Reuters Web of Science.
Brad Verhulst, a Virginia Commonwealth University researcher and a co-author of the paper, said he was not sure who was to blame.
“I don’t know where it happened. All I know is it happened,” he told Retraction Watch, a blog that tracks corrections in academic papers. “It’s our fault for not figuring it out before.”
The journal said the error doesn’t change the main conclusions of the paper, which found that “personality traits do not cause people to develop political attitudes.”
But professor Steven Ludeke of the University of Southern Denmark, who pointed out the errors, told Retraction Watch that they “matter quite a lot.”
“The erroneous results represented some of the larger correlations between personality and politics ever reported; they were reported and interpreted, repeatedly, in the wrong direction,” he said.
Poor "fogcatcher," as much as he tries he still can't get it correct
A little education, the NY Post is a conservative source, although it does have a famous sports section. Danika Fears is a conservative opinion writer, in this case authoring a conservative piece in a conservative newspaper. Nothing wrong with either, however, as such, she has framed a study to conclude that "liberals are psychotic," which "fogcatcher" ate up, really thought he had a "gotcha" moment
Now from the study itself, "Having a high Psychoticism score is not a diagnosis of being clinically psychotic or psychopathic." (a small detail Danika left out)
https://retractionwatch.com/2016/06/...chotic-traits/
And what makes "fogcatcher's" post even more humorous is his employment of "Science," a entity he flatly denys when it comes to another famous topic
Beautiful, suppose I'll be banned again
cancel2 2022 (10-16-2018)
cancel2 2022 (10-16-2018)
tinfoil (10-16-2018)
Bookmarks