←Back
Conservatives are more likely to click on sponsored search results and
are likely to be more trusting of sponsored communications than
liberals, who lean toward organic content. Conservatives were more
likely to click ads in response to broad searches because they may be
less cognitively demanding.
https://theconversation.com/your-politics-can-affect-whether-you-clic...
########################################################################

|u/AutoModerator - 12 hours
|
|Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to
|keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people
|want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal
|lives, so to give people a space to do that, **personal anecdotes are
|allowed as responses to this comment**. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere
|in the discussion will be removed and our [normal comment rules](
|https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/rules#wiki_comment_rules) apply to
|all other comments.  ---  **Do you have an academic degree?** We can
|verify your credentials in order to assign user flair indicating your
|area of expertise. [Click here to
|apply](https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/flair/).  ---  User: u/mvea
|Permalink: https://theconversation.com/your-politics-can-affect-whether-
|you-click-on-sponsored-search-results-new-research-shows-239800  ---  *I
|am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact
|the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/science) if
|you have any questions or concerns.*


|u/polishprince76 - 11 hours
|
|It's honestly shocking how bad an internet search has become. Just
|mountains of garbage before you get to an answer remotely close to what
|you need.


    |u/Uchihagod53 - 9 hours
    |
    |I honestly can't remember the last time I've had to go to page 2 on
    |a Google search.


      |u/rarestakesando - 9 hours
      |
      |Half the time the answer they direct me too eventually that
      |actually helps is you guessed it right here on Reddit.


        |u/thatryanguy82 - 8 hours
        |
        |I've long since gotten into the habit of adding "reddit" to any
        |google search when I'm looking for the answer to a question.


          |u/TooStrangeForWeird - 8 hours
          |
          |That's why Google bought Reddit data to use for their AI.
          |Unfortunately it doesn't understand jokes or sarcasm, hence
          |the "put Elmer's glue in the cheese so it doesn't slide off
          |the pizza" incident.


            |u/yttakinenthusiast - 7 hours
            |
            |also **cock**roaches.


              |u/TheEyeDontLie - 6 hours
              |
              |Google bought cockroaches. Cockroaches are the best pizza
              |topping.


              |u/NightLordsPublicist - 5 hours
              |
              |What a lovely day for a lobotomy.


                |u/yttakinenthusiast - 5 hours
                |
                |can't say i blame you. that AI-gen answer made my skin
                |crawl.


            |u/LeftieDu - 6 hours
            |
            |This one might have came from a genuine tip for food
            |photography.


              |u/Ralkon - 4 hours
              |
              |I'm not sure if there's a standard for food photography,
              |but there was [this post](https://www.reddit.com/r/Pizza/c
              |omments/1a19s0/my_cheese_slides_off_the_pizza_too_easily/)
              |where the top comment specifically says "1/8 cup of
              |Elmer's glue... It'll give the sauce a little extra
              |tackiness" and the google AI response included [both of
              |those details](https://www.reddit.com/r/ShittyLifeProTips/
              |comments/1cz83mc/slpt_google_ai_suggests_glue_to_keep_chee
              |se_from/).


          |u/TARandomNumbers - 8 hours
          |
          |Don't say it out loud bro


        |u/BlacksmithSolid645 - 7 hours
        |
        |I've looked for something and landed on reddit and read a post
        |and it was my comment I've made to someone else asking the same
        |question years prior


      |u/n8mo - 9 hours
      |
      |Me neither.  But, increasingly, I have to go to the 5th or 6th
      |result to find something that isn't an advert or AI generated blog
      |garbage.  At this point I just add *"reddit.com"* to every search.
      |If reddit's native search function wasn't so bad, I might never
      |google again tbh.


        |u/External-into-Space - 8 hours
        |
        |Even better, add   sites:reddit.com  *shows just reddit results,
        |mostly better then searching on reddit itself*


          |u/Mental_Tea_4084 - 8 hours
          |
          |Search operators are rapidly dying too. AND and NOT and their
          |counterparts + and - are just suggestions these days,  not
          |rules. Quotations are the same. I was looking up a laptop by
          |model number today and even putting it in quotes I was getting
          |random garbage that was only similarly spelled but completely
          |irrelevant


            |u/orthogonius - 8 hours
            |
            |I really miss the NEAR operator that either Altavista or Ask
            |Jeeves had. One word or phrase near another, like within 10
            |words or something. I forget the exact parameters


      |u/mellowanon - 8 hours
      |
      |if I search and it's not on the first page, I reword my search to
      |get different results. Or I just put "reddit" in the search and
      |see what reddit results pops up.  Too many websites are SEO bait
      |and are worthless.


      |u/JetAmoeba - 9 hours
      |
      |Ya, if it’s not on page 1 I refine my search and try again


        |u/AustinTheFiend - 7 hours
        |
        |I've had many instances where I have to scroll all the way to
        |the bottom of the page and tell it to stop filtering out similar
        |results, as searches regarding very specific game engine bugs
        |usually result in like 3 threads talking about the exact same
        |problem that's not what I'm facing, whereas the useful
        |information tends to be deemed redundant and gets filtered out.
        |It'd be nice if all that wasted space filled with ads (and even
        |more galling) completely irrelevant web pages just had a couple
        |more of those redundant results included.


      |u/ebolaRETURNS - 6 hours
      |
      |but 3/4ths of the way down on page 1 is pretty common for me.


      |u/LNMagic - 6 hours
      |
      |Usually if it's not on the first page, it's because I need to
      |adjust my search terms. If it's a tough one, then my struggle is
      |to figure out the right question to ask.


      |u/LeafyWolf - 1 hour
      |
      |I've started going to page 4 and 5 now because the first couple of
      |pages are videos or ads, and I'm looking for actual information.
      |The other day I went to Bing for a search that Google was fumbling
      |hard (just ads for pages).  To my surprise, Bing had the result I
      |was looking for on the bottom of the first page.


      |u/Bunkerman91 - 9 hours
      |
      |Found the conservative


    |u/General_Mars - 6 hours
    |
    |I might be the only one this also annoys, but it used to be that you
    |could save the preference for 100 results per page. The continuation
    |of results was just the further you went the less relevant the
    |results would be - to the engine at least. Sometimes though because
    |of keywords it could yield interesting results. Now it continually
    |resets or gaslights you to 25-50 results and it’ll show more pages
    |exist and then as you progress it just ends


    |u/DarkbladeShadowedge - 5 hours
    |
    |It’s so annoying when you google something and all the results are
    |just articles rehashing the same answer. This happens a lot when I
    |look up a question to a video game. One guy writes a guide or
    |something, and 6 others will just copy paste it onto their website. 
    |I understand there’s only so many ways to answer a question, but
    |it’s word for word, and sometimes I’m looking for a certain detail
    |that isn’t addressed. 


    |u/drunk_responses - 5 hours
    |
    |To find things these days, you not only have to keep adding
    |-"website.addess" to searches, you also have to exclude the last two
    |years from results. Or you'll end up with 90% AI written "articles",
    |that are the forty versions of the same paragraph worded slightly
    |differently, all made within the last two years or so.  On top of
    |that, they're still struggling to tune their AI interpretation layer
    |on search queries. So it will tell you that it found no results, for
    |a page they find if you add or remove a word.


  |u/nanoH2O - 3 hours
  |
  |And AI finds the wrong answer for you, making it even easier. When you
  |search in google the first thing you see is a concise and very
  |convincing answer generated by AI.


    |u/Beginning_Film7975 - 1 hour
    |
    |I still don't understand how people put any faith in AI generated
    |answers. It can't assess evidence or sources. It literally just
    |spits out a hodgpodge of words based on things that have been
    |written by real people, things that are not all true and sometimes
    |straight up contradictory.   The words it spits out are impressively
    |grammatical and it kind of proves the Turing test is inadequate as a
    |measure of real intelligence, but that's about it


      |u/nanoH2O - 1 hour
      |
      |Yeah it’s a bit concerning how confident it is. At least google
      |gives links to where it got the information. I find it as a useful
      |starting point.


  |u/boa_instructor - 5 hours
  |
  |That's why I just put "reddit" at the end of any question for google


    |u/Darkhoof - 2 hours
    |
    |There's more and more sponsored fake reviews on Reddit though.


|u/tert_butoxide - 10 hours
|
|From the actual scientific article abstract, emphasis mine--  > Search
|advertising involves the purchasing of an ad’s position at the top of a
|search engine results page and accounts for more than 40% of all digital
|ad spending in the United States. Nevertheless, consumers are more
|likely to click on organic links found below search ads—a phenomenon
|referred to as the search ad avoidance effect. Combining system
|justification and construal level theory, a politically identifiable
|segment of consumers is argued to counter this effect. **Because
|individuals with a conservative (vs. liberal) political orientation tend
|to justify systemic processes**, they are more likely to trust sponsored
|versus organic marketing communications. Across four studies (secondary
|data, surveys, online field experiment), conservatives (vs. liberals)
|are more likely to click on search ads because **they perceive them as
|more trustworthy**. This relationship is most prevalent when consumers
|conduct broad searches, activating an abstract search construal that
|relies on a thinking style consistent with one’s core ideological
|beliefs and values. However, both conservatives and liberals are equally
|likely to click on search ads when they conduct more specific searches,
|activating a concrete search construal that enables a thinking style
|that is context-dependent and therefore diverges from one’s core beliefs
|and values.  So my understanding of that is basically that conservatives
|are more likely to trust the existing system to provide what they're
|looking for, whereas liberals are more skeptical, doubting, or
|questioning of this service. In this case the existing system is search
|ad sponsorship. Maybe there are parallels to other things though. Do you
|have faith in traditional social, political, economic systems and think
|those systems are to the benefit of people like you?-- and do you think
|your trustworthy search platform is trying to give you helpful or useful
|ads based on its best interpretation of your query? Or do you question
|the methods and motives of those systems, thinking that they were built
|to enrich others at your expense?-- and think that your search program
|is forcefeeding you unwanted and unhelpful ads for someone else's
|profit?


  |u/Crammucho - 6 hours
  |
  |Surely there are other factors at play here, this seems to be a very
  |narrow scope leaning into a specific reasoning. Couldn't age be a
  |factor, older crowds being more conservative and having less/later
  |experiences with Internet. Do conservatives maybe in general utilize
  |Internet search less and have less precise experience with best
  |choices of search results..


    |u/EredarLordJaraxxus - 2 hours
    |
    |I was going to say, The older someone is the less tech literate they
    |are, And the less likely they are to realize that the first or
    |second option on a Google search is most likely an ad.


  |u/P0pu1arBr0ws3r - 8 hours
  |
  |It does sound like this study can make connections beyond search
  |results. I think if a similar study were performed with modern media
  |similar results could be found, where conservatives would be more
  |trusting of conservative media and liberals more skeptical of liberal
  |media, and perhaps conservative media being designed to reduce
  |cognitive load (possibly to increase attention to less informed folk).
  |If anything, a simple study like this could be expanded to answer how
  |the modern political climate is so divided and opposing as it is
  |today, and why theres reports of voters regretting or being uninformed
  |when they voted in the recent election.


    |u/BraveAddict - 6 hours
    |
    |I've heard it said that conservative media often spoon feeds pre-
    |chewed food to the republicans at home.


      |u/Skwiish - 4 hours
      |
      |Next time some historical event happens, pay attention to how long
      |it takes for there to be contrarian discourse about it online.
      |There’s usually a bit of a lag because they haven’t been told how
      |to feel yet.


    |u/Agent-Blasto-007 - 1 hour
    |
    |During WWI, the British Government discovered that using penny
    |pamphlets and propaganda news articles in Newspapers  was very
    |effective because by purchasing the propaganda, the person became
    |invested in it & would be more likely to believe it and more
    |importantly defend it.   Popular authors, like HG Wells & Arthur
    |Conan Doyle were recruited to write these pamphlets & articles
    |https://fantastic-writers-and-the-great-war.com/war-experiences/sir-
    |arthur-conan-doyle/#:~:text=Doyle%20was%20of%20course%20too,close%20
    |to%20Royal%20Tunbridge%20Wells.  It's a continuation of that: the
    |person becomes personally invested in the propaganda:  it's not just
    |conservative media they're defending, it's their identity.


  |u/Bubudel - 4 hours
  |
  |>conservatives are more likely to trust the existing system to provide
  |what they're looking for  This doesn't apply to science though.
  |Apparently conservatives are fine with trusting politicians and big
  |corporations, but draw the line at highly educated people who dedicate
  |their life to the betterment of the human condition.


    |u/AtheistAustralis - 57 minutes
    |
    |They'll believe science just fine, as long as it reinforces their
    |pre-existing beliefs. If it contradicts them, it's obviously
    |rubbish. It's why they were touting the half dozen scientific
    |articles that advocated for horse wormer during covid, but ignored
    |the tens of thousands of better articles that said the opposite.


    |u/Richard-Brecky - 2 hours
    |
    |They’ve got a whole different “system” of broadcasters and pundits
    |and influencers that was set up to tell them that the scientists are
    |corrupt and wrong. Their system exposes the secret truth about the
    |science, and all us idiots are still in the dark.


  |u/-Wylfen- - 4 hours
  |
  |>**Because individuals with a conservative (vs. liberal) political
  |orientation tend to justify systemic processes**, they are more likely
  |to trust sponsored versus organic marketing communications.  Does the
  |study actually prove that point or is that conjecture?  Because
  |intuitively, I'd just assume that older people are more conservative
  |*and* happen to also blindly trust technology.


  |u/prismstein - 50 minutes
  |
  |"have faith in traditional social, political, economic systems"  VS
  |the big gov is selling out the country, the swamp, the deep state,
  |vaccines makes kids gay etc etc  the cognitive dissonance is
  |remarkable  how about we just interpret it like what the scientists
  |intended:  >Conservatives are stupider.  sorry I'm not in a charitable
  |mood.


  |u/boofjoof - 5 hours
  |
  |I like this explanation. I was thinking it was weird for conservatives
  |to be more trusting since they seem pretty distrusting of the status
  |quo lately, but it does make sense that if you live in a system that
  |caters to people like you, you aren't going to be as quick to wonder
  |if people actually have your best interest at heart.


    |u/S0LO_Bot - 10 hours
    |
    |Can you elaborate a bit more please? I never even considered that
    |there could be a cultural divide over methods of logic and
    |reasoning.


      |u/Ardnabrak - 10 hours
      |
      |It might be a "Don't question authority" versus an "Always
      |question authority" type of thing. Conservatives usually have had
      |a religious or strongly patriarchal upbringing. This may inhibit
      |their skepticism since they heard a lot of "Do as I say, not as I
      |do" and "Don't question these things!" type rhetoric.


        |u/stalinusmc - 10 hours
        |
        |As one who was raised by the ‘do as I say, not what I do’
        |parents, this is absolutely true. Most conservatives I know
        |don’t fact check anything that they come across, or use logic to
        |extrapolate the possible circumstances. They allow their
        |emotions to drive their response.


          |u/cammyjit - 8 hours
          |
          |I know plenty of folks who literally will not question
          |something they were told like 30 years ago, unless you show
          |irrefutable evidence that it’s wrong.   Even then, that’s just
          |the questioning part, not the acceptance part


        |u/TalosMessenger01 - 9 hours
        |
        |How does this correlate to the highly skeptical form of
        |conservatism? Everything from conspiracy theorists to people who
        |are just distrusting of the government, experts, and the default
        |consensus on things. It’s a pretty big thing in even mainstream
        |conservative politics. Not properly utilized skepticism imo
        |(their mistake I think is not holding their own ideas to the
        |same level of scrutiny as the ideas they attack) but it’s still
        |there.


          |u/lsda - 9 hours
          |
          |I read a paper years ago regarding how conservatives are much
          |more trustworthy of in groups than out groups. So it could
          |very well be a scenario where they have determined the group
          |giving the conspiracy theories to be in groups. The thing I've
          |noticed with the conspiracy types, is that they are very quick
          |to believe a conspiracy that fits their narrative while
          |distrusting of those that do not. So it could come down to a
          |combination of in groups and outgroups as well as questioning
          |authority. So I believe what X says because they are a leader
          |and I doubt what Y says because they cannot be trusted.  I'll
          |have to find the paper I read on right-wing group thinkings.
          |It may have been the book"the authoritarians" by Bob Altemeyer


          |u/Ardnabrak - 9 hours
          |
          |Yeah, that would require a deeper dive. The conspiracy theory
          |types are all over the political spectrum, so I think there is
          |something entirely different that influences their
          |development. Paranoia and suspicion seem to be the big
          |motivations for them.


          |u/UsernameUsername8936 - 3 hours
          |
          |No, I'd argue that that's the same lack of thought. They have
          |their "information," anything that easily fits is added
          |blindly without question, and anything that doesn't is
          |rejected without consideration. It's just some fringe Internet
          |weirdo that's thinking for them, instead of some other, more
          |conventional individual. Same premise, just with a different
          |ideology.


      |u/Waste_Cantaloupe3609 - 10 hours
      |
      |From the article: “I suspect this is because broad searches are
      |less cognitively demanding – in other words, they require less
      |brainpower. This allows our core beliefs to influence our
      |decisions. In fact, this is consistent with research on
      |information processing that shows broad thinking leads to stronger
      |political attitudes.  On the other hand, I argue that specific
      |searches require us to pay close attention to the information we
      |are processing, which disables our core beliefs from being the
      |primary influence on our decisions.”  Edit: the article does not
      |ever make the claim that conservatives are less inclined to engage
      |in cognitively demanding tasks; the author instead claims that
      |conservatives trust ads while liberals do not (because of research
      |they performed, not due to their beliefs about conservatives and
      |liberals) and that this “core belief” driven behavior was not
      |apparent when users made a targeted search — conservatives clicked
      |ads more if they searched for “headphones” but at the same rate as
      |liberals if they searched for “headphones with sound canceling
      |microphone”


    |u/sirhoracedarwin - 10 hours
    |
    |"cognitive strain of reasoning?" This sounds like they don't like to
    |*think*.


      |u/chrltrn - 10 hours
      |
      |It's exactly that, but why do you make it seem like some alien
      |concept?   Guaranteed, at some point today, you made some decision
      |that mightve been suboptimal because you didn't want to bother to
      |put more thought into it than you did.      Thinking takes time,
      |afterall


        |u/Tbagmoo - 10 hours
        |
        |I'm really enjoying your reframing of the issue. It's some good
        |food for thought.  Thank you


        |u/Montana_Gamer - 9 hours
        |
        |The research that has been going on regarding political thought
        |has been very validating to this explanation. Irrationality,
        |believe it or not, is so often done from the perception of
        |behaving rationally.  I cannot imagine going through my life
        |living like that, at the same time the appeal to it is quite
        |clear.


        |u/RealisticIllusions82 - 9 hours
        |
        |And energy. And likely why liberals are less happy overall, from
        |what I’ve seen. Thinking all the time tends to make one
        |depressed.


        |u/adamdoesmusic - 9 hours
        |
        |Opening this app… several times a day… and hours disappear.


      |u/Stripe_Show69 - 7 hours
      |
      |They think, but they think the wrong things. There is no threshold
      |their reasoning has to meet. If it sounds good, it must be true.
      |Never mind abandoning Ukraine could lead to an invasion of more
      |countries. All they see is that right now we’re giving them money
      |their groceries are expensive.  Which has nothing to do with the
      |money being sent to Ukraine.


  |u/bx35 - 10 hours
  |
  |It’s a slippery slope: when you offer them evidence (e.g., tariffs,
  |fascists, garbage), they become reactive and choose to sink the ship.


  |u/lachwee - 11 hours
  |
  |Yes they are talking about conservatives after all


|u/Huger_and_shinier - 11 hours
|
|“Less cognitively demanding” is a very polite phrase.


  |u/The_Last_Ball_Bender - 9 hours
  |
  |Dumb people gonna dumb. Essentially..


  |u/faireymagik2 - 7 hours
  |
  |To be fair, if you read the title a little more closely “less
  |cognitively demanding“ is in reference to the search, not the
  |searcher. I made the same mistake when I first read the title. But if
  |you read the article, it makes it clear.


    |u/p333p33p00p00boo - 5 hours
    |
    |Correct, that was understood from my end. It’s still a little bit
    |insulting and pretty funny


      |u/atothez - 4 hours
      |
      |I don’t see it as insulting.  It’s just indicative of choice
      |fatigue.  It tells me that other things are taking up
      |conservative’s cognative capacity and they’re past the breaking
      |point.  I think it explains why reason so often fails them.  It’s
      |not that they’re dumb, exactly (though it presents that way),
      |they’re overloaded in cognatively supporting their prior choices
      |(the whole basis of conservatism).


        |u/thepasttenseofdraw - 1 hour
        |
        |> It tells me that other things are taking up conservative’s
        |cognative capacity   Like remembering to breathe?


          |u/Chief_Chill - 36 minutes
          |
          |Yeah, the "overloaded" part of that statement tells me this
          |person has never been in a room with a conservative. The only
          |thing that is firing at all times with those people is their
          |amygdala reactivity. I don't think they "trust" the sponsored
          |ads more, I think they are just less discerning and lazy (with
          |regards to further evaluation of results). We have greatly
          |become a society of immediate gratification and short
          |attention spans.


    |u/fusionsofwonder - 6 hours
    |
    |Doesn't really put the test subject in a positive light either way
    |though.


  |u/CausticSofa - 9 hours
  |
  |Can we just collectively address how disappointing this timeline has
  |turned out to be?


    |u/snajk138 - 8 hours
    |
    |Time to get some fake goatees until we can grow real ones.


  |u/boofjoof - 5 hours
  |
  |When the author says that, he's referring to the search. The article
  |says that no such correlation exists for highly specific searches
  |(with 'headphones' versus 'headphones with active noise cancelling' as
  |an example) whereas it does exist for broader searches which are 'less
  |cognitively demanding'.


  |u/BobDonowitz - 8 hours
  |
  |"Conservatives have the IQ of a cow after it's been slaughtered new
  |research shows" was deemed too disrespectful towards cows.


|u/MyPenisIsWeeping - 10 hours
|
|Install adblock on your parents devices to fight authoritarianism!
|Adguard dns works for Android phones


  |u/Nadare3 - 4 hours
  |
  |Yeah...on all 4 browsers of her computer.  *Screams uncontrollably*


  |u/cunnyvore - 3 hours
  |
  |It doesn’t work. They *want* the ads for some reason. Wild


  |u/Wet_Sanding - 6 hours
  |
  |Ublock origin on Firefox mobile.


  |u/jamesholden - 6 hours
  |
  |nextdns works for nearly everything. uses the same adblock list as
  |good adblockers once you enable them.  I've spent the past few months
  |trying to get to 100% firefox on desktop and mobile. I used to do most
  |of my browsing in chrome, keeping important stuff in firefox (email,
  |banking). ublock origin on all.  also RIF and youtube revanced on
  |mobile. smarttube on tv.


|u/cobitos - 12 hours
|
|Probably cause more boomers lean conservative


  |u/Eternal_Being - 11 hours
  |
  |>"Neither age nor income had any significant impact."


    |u/Time-Maintenance2165 - 9 hours
    |
    |They used median age and income to attempt to correct for that.
    |That's such a bad way of trying to correct that it's nearly
    |worthless.


  |u/AThousandBloodhounds - 10 hours
  |
  |Can't pin it on boomers.  It took an extremely large and dysfunctional
  |village to get us to where we are today.


  |u/majestic-culverts - 11 hours
  |
  |Gen X are more conservative than boomers (in the US at least)


  |u/shkeptikal - 11 hours
  |
  |20 years ago, sure. Things have changed and the demographics have
  |shifted. See the exit polls for more information and be sure to thank
  |Elon and the "right wing" podcasters who were paid by the FSB to
  |destabilize America by radicalizing young men into voting against
  |their own futures.


  |u/Strong-Decision-1216 - 7 hours
  |
  |Do you mean people raised on books and not tiktok?


  |u/ogpotato - 10 hours
  |
  |Apparently so are the gen z


    |u/MyPenisIsWeeping - 10 hours
    |
    |No they still lean blue but most liberal gen a stayed home on the
    |5th


  |u/TentacleHockey - 12 hours
  |
  |I think you are missing the biggest issue here. IQ.


    |u/magus678 - 10 hours
    |
    |It's odd how reddit pretends IQ isn't a thing until it's convenient.


      |u/henzry - 10 hours
      |
      |It’s not really relevant when you’re talking about places lacking
      |formalized education systems. More relevant when your talking
      |about two groups who ostensibly had the same educational
      |opportunities


        |u/haarschmuck - 9 hours
        |
        |Education has nothing to do with IQ.  IQ is static.


  |u/YoloKraize - 2 hours
  |
  |Lead water goes hard for them.


  |u/Nervous-Project7107 - 11 hours
  |
  |If you read the article and the study they never use the words “less
  |cognitively demanding”, they even say conversative states have higher
  |income. This reddit post is just karma farming.


    |u/richmondody - 10 hours
    |
    |It does actually:  > **I suspect this is because broad searches are
    |less cognitively demanding – in other words, they require less
    |brainpower**. This allows our core beliefs to influence our
    |decisions. In fact, this is consistent with research on information
    |processing that shows broad thinking leads to stronger political
    |attitudes.   That being said, I do agree that engaging in less
    |cognitively demanding tasks doesn't mean that the person is dumb.


    |u/helvetica01 - 9 hours
    |
    |incorrect, *twice.*   >conservatives were more likely to click ads
    |in response to broad searches, such as “Buy headphones.” But for
    |more specific, detailed searches – for example, “Buy headphones with
    |microphone that reduces background noise” – there was no
    |relationship between politics and clicks.  >I suspect this is
    |because broad searches are less cognitively demanding – in other
    |words, they require less brainpower. This allows our core beliefs to
    |influence our decisions. In fact, this is consistent with research
    |on information processing that shows broad thinking leads to
    |stronger political attitudes.   the article *does not say
    |conservative states have higher income*.   >Given that, on average,
    |conservatives are older and have higher incomes than liberals, I
    |also looked at each state’s median age and per-capita personal
    |income. Again, the data confirmed the relationship between
    |conservatism and search ad clicks. Neither age nor income had any
    |significant impact.  the conclusion made is: conservatism and
    |clicking ads is strongly related; age/income and clicking ads were
    |not related. it makes no claim about conservatism and state income.
    |only that he sought to compare median state incomes against rate of
    |clicking ads.


  |u/Livid_Zucchini_1625 - 11 hours
  |
  |there's a pattern of attributes that point to the path of
  |conservatives seeking the least cognitively tasking path.  whether
  |it's this, humor, propaganda and other areas


|u/dsmjrv - 11 hours
|
|Let’s look at the studies criteria for “sponsored “


  |u/boofjoof - 5 hours
  |
  |Google is required to disclose when search ads are sponsored. It
  |appears above the link.


|u/kozy8805 - 9 hours
|
|That’s why contrary to popular belief of arguing online, the easiest way
|to actually get to know people and change their opinion is to actually
|going offline and getting to know them. Which builds the trust you need.


  |u/Lordborgman - 7 hours
  |
  |I grew up and went to school with people from, and eventually left
  |Polk county; 1986 to 2020. There is no amount of knowing most of those
  |people that will change a damn thing for the better. No matter how
  |calm, reasonable, logical, nicely worded, non confrontational, or
  |factual. Seemingly nothing will break that cognitive dissonance, which
  |we had the same education, we had access to the same information.
  |I've tried desperately, even with my closet friends of 37 years at
  |some point eventually called me a "Democratic socialist f*ggot" for my
  |views on healthcare, abortion, economics, and ethics. It's maddeningly
  |depressing.


    |u/kozy8805 - 7 hours
    |
    |Of course there is, I’ve seen plenty of it done myself. If it could
    |be done in the middle of nothing red states, it can be done
    |anywhere. There’s just 2 points.   1. You’re not going to change
    |everyone. As a matter of fact you’re not going to change most
    |people. What you’re looking to change, what changes elections (both
    |local and national) are a few percent. Not 10, not 20, not 50. 3-4.
    |That’s a maddening amount of rejection. All change is.   2. Arguing
    |doesn’t really work in the beginning. Going against whatever the
    |norm is makes you “the outsider”. Thats me putting it nicely.
    |Building trust and slowly breaking it down piece by piece can work.
    |From what I’ve seen, and take this as anecdotal, it works like this.
    |Mechanic John, your friendly never rip you off mechanic, tells you
    |what’s wrong with your car. You trust him, so you’re inclined to
    |believe him and the price he charges. Substitute car with any topic,
    |and you got your change. You’re looking to become mechanic John for
    |whatever change you want. That’s how these communities work by and
    |large. They’re ingrained with people they trust saying certain
    |things. Changing them is getting into that. It’s hard, stressful,
    |mostly ungrateful work. But that is the only way anything will ever
    |change.


      |u/Lordborgman - 7 hours
      |
      |Yeah I get what you are saying, just sucks that several 37 year
      |friendships is not even enough for the trust of some of them. Not
      |just a mechanic you interact with a few times, someone I knew and
      |saw daily for decades, some I _LIVED_ with etc...


|u/throwaway490215 - 8 hours
|
|Wait.  This is why Google and Facebook are so rich?   There are people
|clicking the ads?


  |u/LowDownDirtyMeme - 12 hours
  |
  |I done hurt my thinking muscle on the title!


|u/SucculentHorder - 10 hours
|
|Lies. It's really just people trying to close out the ad by pressing the
|stupid microscopic X.


|u/MidwesternDude2024 - 9 hours
|
|Has the “study” in the story been peer reviewed and its findings been
|duplicated? No. Please I am begging people to stop sharing bad faith
|stories like this. It’s not science. It just reinforces priors, which
|should make you doubt the story.


|u/jon3ssing - 10 hours
|
|This is going to be an interesting thread - *sort by controversial*.


|u/Rocky_Vigoda - 9 hours
|
|Man i'm so tired of this.  "Science proves American liberals are the
|smartest and best people on the planet".  No one is really taught proper
|media literacy or how to vet information. Go on the canada sub. Half the
|links are for commentary/editorial articles which are practically the
|same thing as ads yet no one complains because they mention it barely in
|the headline.


|u/solidshakego - 11 hours
|
|I'm a liberal leaning person with an ad blocker. What does that make me?


  |u/CaptainMudwhistle - 8 hours
  |
  |Nothing to click = least cognitively demanding = absolute simpleton


    |u/solidshakego - 8 hours
    |
    |Works for me


|u/imbrickedup_ - 9 hours
|
|How is even this sub political


|u/Pudding-Immediate - 11 hours
|
|Less cognitively demanding…. Hahahahaha


|u/Strange_Quote6013 - 9 hours
|
|I don't think this is because they're conservative I think it's because
|conservatives are older, on average, and less tech savvy. My dad is a 73
|year old socialist and doesn't even know how to copy + paste.


|u/confon68 - 8 hours
|
|How do even determine if someone’s political affiliation has any bearing
|on this. Wild.


|u/SupervillainMustache - 8 hours
|
|It's second nature for me to ignore sponsored content.


|u/BagOfCatLitter - 7 hours
|
|Someone keeps changing my search engine from Google to Yahoo on my work
|computer. IDK who it is.


|u/KevineCove - 7 hours
|
|There are so many possible correlations here that invert (or subvert)
|the implication of this headline. The two that came to mind are:  1.
|Sponsored posts are more likely to be conservative because big business
|leans conservative, but if the viewer is already conservative, they're
|clicking on posts based on confirmation bias because they like the
|content, not because they necessarily trust the source.  2.
|Conservatives tend to be older and may be less tech savvy, so they may
|not even recognize a sponsored post is sponsored in the first place. You
|could call it naivete perhaps but you can't call it a deliberate act of
|trust.


|u/adeline882 - 7 hours
|
|And in this thread a completely lack of desire to and the question why.
|This just feels like another attempt to dunk on conservatives as,
|“stupid.” Instead of looking at what creates a scenario where low
|information voters exist.


|u/AllSpicNoSpan - 6 hours
|
|The sponsored links are the first ones that populate in Google. If I'm
|searching for running shoes, and the first link directs me to Under
|Armour, I'm going to click on that link regardless of whether or not
|it's sponsored, because it's first and it will direct me to what I'm
|looking for. What an obtuse article.


|u/ebolaRETURNS - 6 hours
|
|I'm too lazy to defeat the paywall guarding the primary study, but I
|wonder what the basal rate of clicks toward sponsored links is.  I would
|have naively assumed very low among all groups.  Eg, I'll for the most
|part screen them out mentally, unless my search is like for "plant
|shop".


|u/Dangerous_Function16 - 6 hours
|
|Is this controlling for age? Typically this type of media illiteracy is
|something you associate with older generations, as is conservatism.


|u/LaunchGap - 5 hours
|
|clicks i can understand. i've clicked many "singles in your area" links
|in my day. but i've stopped clicking links many years ago. what are the
|conservative groups in this study? are there age groups?


|u/xavster - 1 hour
|
|tldr: conservatives are older, older people are less tech savvy and more
|likely to be tricked into clicking ads.  The end.


|u/IAmAccutane - 1 hour
|
|Is this controlled for age? I feel like a Gen Xer of any political
|affiliation would react the same way.


|u/ZezimaIsMyTrueLove - 29 minutes
|
|this the type of shi r/science has been reduced to


|u/pepperoni86 - 7 hours
|
|Low key another ‘let’s insult conservatives’ intellect article.


  |u/FlamboyantPirhanna - 2 hours
  |
  |I don’t subscribe to this sub, so I only see what shows up in popular,
  |and every damn post from this sub there is some version of that. I’m
  |very very far from conservative, but it’s all just thinly veiled
  |tribalism.


|u/CoolnessEludesMe - 7 hours
|
|Being raised in a church conditions you to just believe what you're
|told, however irrational, rather than to think for yourself.


|u/Entraprenure - 10 hours
|
|I highly doubt this has any truth to it. Liberals drink the koolaid
|willingly even if it’s obvious propaganda


|u/Fluid-Bread3480 - 8 hours
|
|all correlation of giant population couple of percentages removed from
|margin of error, this is a lot of nothing xD


|u/Rich_Psychology8990 - 9 hours
|
|In related research, liberals were over 385% more likely to believe any
|claim written in a manner that suggests it came from an academic journal
|or reflects a current scientific consensus, even when no citation is
|provided or the claim does not match their everyday life experiwnce.
|Remarkably, the liberal susceptibility to academic-coded language was
|increased by nearly 1,100% when the claim denigrated conservatives,
|religious believers, or white male corporate executives, with roughly
|one-third of self-identified liberal respondents describing false
|memories of having read the source document, even when both the article
|and publication were completely fictitious.


  |u/adtcjkcx - 45 minutes
  |
  |Triggered much? Keep crying.


  |u/PM-me-youre-PMs - 4 hours
  |
  |Not gonna lie, that was funny.


|u/Yay4sean - 10 hours
|
|I was too lazy to bypass the paywall, but this quote seems to be the
|most relevant:  >I found that more conservative states were associated
|with more clicks for search ads over organic links. Specifically, a 10%
|increase in a state’s conservative identity was associated with a 6.4%
|increase in search ad clicks.  Given that, on average, conservatives are
|older and have higher incomes than liberals, I also looked at each
|state’s median age and per-capita personal income. Again, the data
|confirmed the relationship between conservatism and search ad clicks.
|Neither age nor income had any significant impact.  I really don't find
|a 5-15 increase particularly meaningful.  This is a pretty marginal
|difference, and doesn't *really* say that much about these two
|populations.  Are we going to make broad generalizations based off of
|just 5-15% differences?  And I really don't think this is telling
|advertisers anything they don't already know.  Most (all?) of
|advertising is based on a bunch of algorithms that have already
|considered every possible thing that leads to increased money.


  |u/nishinoran - 5 hours
  |
  |On top of that their attempts to control for age and income are
  |insanely broad, and don't actually drill down to the same level as the
  |clicks themselves.  Honestly, pretty weak study, but if course OP is
  |using it to push their agenda.


|u/JudasZala - 10 hours
|
|And that’s why God/Allah/Jehovah created ad blockers.


|u/AnnualBadger1147 - 9 hours
|
|I'm conservative,  and I view every sponsored post and ad as a scam.. I
|always have tho as I grew up in the digital age... But I can believe
|this as I have to help so many older folks who cant see the difference..


|u/BrilliantLifter - 11 hours
|
|Explain Funko Pops then.


|u/StromboliOctopus - 10 hours
|
|I could've told you that by the 14,000 vitamin supplements that my fixed
|income trumper step-dad has a spare room dedicated to.


|u/ProfessionalLeave335 - 11 hours
|
|I know this is Reddit. I know I'm self-filtering the content I view
|which only further increases my belief in my worldview. I know that
|because of this my worldview may not be an accurate understanding or
|representation of the world around me. I know all that, but I swear
|everything I read leads me to believe that conservatives are absolute
|morons.


  |u/tacomonday12 - 9 hours
  |
  |Only if you yourself are moronic enough to anchor your thoughts to the
  |headline instead of reading through the entire article. The author
  |never clarifies what he means as "conservative" or "liberal", and
  |concludes that conservatives weren't being fooled by the ads; but were
  |clicking them because they trust the market process more than
  |liberals. That along with the fact that this guy is a marketing
  |professor indicates to the fact that the only thing he really took
  |into account when defining those traits is fiscal policy positions.
  |Dude is basically saying people who trust the market willingly click
  |more ads.


    |u/tendrils87 - 7 hours
    |
    |Add on top of that, that perhaps "liberals" might be more likely to
    |believe THEIR content consumption is more organic. I'm not really
    |sure truly organic content exists anymore once it escape niche
    |spaces.


  |u/christophercolumbus - 8 hours
  |
  |Interesting you are able to identify that line of self reflection but
  |lack the ability to recognize how stupid your conclusion is. These
  |kinds of studies are meaningless. It's nearly impossible to identify
  |political ideology without finding people who are easily bucketed into
  |those identifiers. We've tried everything to identify political
  |ideology through indirect means with some statistical significance and
  |have failed every time. To.even embark on this study shows a failure
  |to adhere to the standards of unbiased statistical analysis.


  |u/Eternal_Being - 11 hours
  |
  |I didn't believe it until I saw about a dozen academic articles over
  |the last decade all finding the same things.


    |u/KanyinLIVE - 8 hours
    |
    |Which are certainly unbiased.


    |u/Random499 - 6 hours
    |
    |There's a couple articles supporting anti-vax ideologies. Doesn't
    |mean they are true and 100% objective with zero bias


  |u/MidwesternDude2024 - 9 hours
  |
  |Google show me the replication crisis


|u/TheMightySet69 - 10 hours
|
|Yup. This is my mom. Constantly getting scam emails, text messages, and
|phone calls. Always asking me to tell her whether it's a scam, if she is
|even savvy enough to question it before forking over her credit card and
|personal info. But, she knows better than I do when I tell her that
|Trump and Newsmax are deceiving her. 


|u/xPrim3xSusp3ctx - 8 hours
|
|I don't think we need more research saying conservatives are mentally
|deficient. We're aware


|u/clintbot - 10 hours
|
|"Less cognitively demanding". I'm stealing that phrase.


|u/Kooky_Tooth_4990 - 10 hours
|
|Are sponsored results always bad? 


  |u/blackhodown - 8 hours
  |
  |No and in fact, in this study, clicking on the sponsored result was
  |actually objectively more efficient, because both links took people to
  |the same pages.


|u/RIPx86x - 7 hours
|
|No...... I block every ad I can.  Who makes this stuff up.


|u/Nakedinthenorthwoods - 6 hours
|
|This is really a subjective call. I would doubt the results as the
|person doing this is most likely a liberal and trying to make liberals
|seem smarter and more logical.  However, if a conservative did this, the
|results would be 180 degrees off from this.


|u/Gellix - 6 hours
|
|54% of US adults have a literacy rate of the 6th grade. I feel like that
|plays into this somewhat.


|u/piperonyl - 11 hours
|
|"conservatives are dumb"  thats the headline TLDR


|u/Significant_Pepper_2 - 11 hours
|
|That's funny how readily the comments jump to the "conservatives stupid"
|conclusion given how easily liberals (it whatever there's on the other
|end of the US political spectrum) fall for foreign propaganda.


  |u/TheWhomItConcerns - 10 hours
  |
  |Do you have any actual research indicating that people on the left are
  |more likely to "fall for" foreign propaganda than the right?


    |u/hellakevin - 3 hours
    |
    |Saw an AI meme on Facebook saying so.


    |u/Electronic-Clock5867 - 10 hours
    |
    |It’s just how he
    |[feels](https://www.salon.com/2021/01/18/conservatives-not-liberals-
    |are-more-inclined-to-value-feelings-over-facts-psychology-study-
    |finds/)


    |u/LolLmaoEven - 6 hours
    |
    |The entirety of reddit.


  |u/Eternal_Being - 11 hours
  |
  |Conservatives are generally more likely to fall for and share
  |misinformation, including foreign propaganda ([source](https://journal
  |s.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/20563051231220330)). It's been
  |[studied](https://news.osu.edu/conservatives-more-susceptible-to-
  |believing-falsehoods/) quite [a
  |lot](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-conservatives-
  |russian-disinformation-survey/).


|u/OutsideFlat1579 - 11 hours
|
|So, conservatives are as stupid as we always thought they were.


|u/beginningagain86 - 8 hours
|
|Had to check to see if it was promoted content.


|u/EfEssKay - 7 hours
|
|Absolute state of this website


|u/Accomplished-Pie-206 - 8 hours
|
|No one is surprised. The less educated someone is the most likely they
|are conservative.


|u/kappakai - 10 hours
|
|“Less cognitively demanding” yah I’m gonna borrow that.


|u/bjornbamse - 10 hours
|
|Trump said 20 maybe 30 years ago that if he ran for the president, he
|would run as a Republican because they have the dumbest voters.


|u/Fun_Environment_8554 - 9 hours
|
|“Less cognitively demanding”. Lolol


|u/NatarisPrime - 8 hours
|
|You mean the group that believes in an invisible man that lives in the
|clouds with zero evidence doesn't need actual evidence to believe the
|things they choose?  Shocking I tell you .


|u/FrancoManiac - 12 hours
|
|*...because they may be less cognitively demanding.*  Well that's really
|the crux of it, isn't it?


|u/QuiGonnJilm - 8 hours
|
|The only reason I cllck on sponsored results is to intentionally cost
|that advertiser money.


|u/boko_harambe_ - 8 hours
|
|I have software on my network that makes sponsored links not even
|resolve.


|u/Si_is_for_Cookie - 8 hours
|
|I just search with AltaVista, by the third page of results you’ll get
|the best Geocities results for any topic. Sure the text might be yellow
|on a white background but at least it’s real content (foolish as it may
|be), and the animated gif header with the midi theme song are totally
|worth it.


|u/Ihaveasmallwang - 8 hours
|
|I click on sponsored results because the company gets charged every time
|someone does.   Also, it’s always the company I’m actually looking for,
|not just random results.


|u/Dunge - 7 hours
|
|Yeah we know.. conservatives are more easily manipulated, story as old
|as time. Why do you think YouTube ads are so much targeting that
|spectrum of people? Because the rest of us know how to use adblockers.


|u/pilfererofgoats - 7 hours
|
|It's a good way to get malware these days.


|u/Untimely_manners - 6 hours
|
|Sounds like kids should install adblockers on to their parents browsers
|to prevent them getting tricked.


|u/Boodikii - 6 hours
|
|How do you not assume Every single ad on the internet contains a virus
|or keylogger?


|u/FoghornFarts - 6 hours
|
|I am curious if they accounted for what was being searched and why? Or
|their ages? The average Republican isn't generally as educated and is
|older so their motivation for using a search engine might be different
|from the average Democrat.  If you're not searching for answers to a
|complex questions and more asking for assistance with shipping or a
|health question, then sponsored links seem fine.


|u/4K05H4784 - 5 hours
|
|Who the hell clicks on those ads? I'm looking for the first and most
|relevant result google gives me, not something less related that is only
|there because someone pays them.


|u/homkono22 - 3 hours
|
|Far right and far left are both absolute idiots. Outside of that there
|can be good polices from either political leanings, the political scale
|is dumb and largely doesn't fit a lot of issues that have more gray or
|not easily explained solutions.   People who call themselves right wing
|conservatives out loud are also more likely to be on the idiot extreme
|end than other people who simply refer to themselves as more left
|leaning (while actually agreeing and disagreeing with individual left
|right policies as they research them).  People are often too dumb to
|understand issues they can't just say yes and no to without nuance. It
|needs to be black-white left-right in their mind, where you blindly have
|to agree with everything your "team" says. Otherwise they'll go around
|calling people uneducated (ironically) fencesitters who can't stand
|their ground.


|u/Icyforgeaxe - 3 hours
|
|Is it possible they just run less adblock? I feel like liberals are
|typically more tech savvy.


|u/topher7930 - 3 hours
|
|"may be" is doing a lot of heavy lifting in that title .


|u/maximiseYourChill - 3 hours
|
|> I suspect this is because broad searches are less cognitively
|demanding – in other words, they require less brainpower.  TIL that
|trusting some of the most sophisticated algos in human history is being
|a dumb dumb.


|u/the_hair_of_aenarion - 1 hour
|
|I wonder if you can classify probability of being a conservative /
|liberal, based only on whether they click the top sponsored result or
|the one directly below it, when both lead to the place.


|u/Daffan - 1 hour
|
|That's called efficiency.


|u/RockfishGapYear - 57 minutes
|
|Cool, now stop feeling smug and start building a populist advertising
|offensive that figures out how to suck away as many of these people as
|possible.


|u/oscurritos - 53 minutes
|
|I'm just curious how accurate this is, I feel like politics and your
|beliefs shouldn't be something considered an influencer of other
|behaviors, it isnt some disorder, I feel like the only question you can
|really ask about politics is what influences someone's political
|beliefs, not the other way around, beung what does someone's political
|beliefs influence. I mean, what classifies as a conservative? Politics
|is a broad spectrum, there are many people who may lean conservatively
|but not fit the type of conservative pictured in this survey.


|u/Ahad_Haam - 33 minutes
|
|People actually click on ads?


|u/miacova - 11 minutes
|
|>less cognitively demanding  Ya think?


|u/sayleanenlarge - 9 minutes
|
|I think we can take advantage of them. If they're unwilling to question,
|then they're fair game for getting them to spend money.