IDEOLOGICAL BIAS IN POLITICAL PSYCHOLOGY - THE VIEW FROM SCIENTIFIC HELL

Tetlock asserts that the work of Sears and Kinder on symbolic racism is ''deeply politicized,'' which has ''profoundly shaped standards of evidence and proof.'' He is particularly concerned that this research automatically indicts conservatives as racists. Contrary to his presupposition, in 10 empirical studies, conducted over more than two decades of research, and using a variety of different research strategies, we have assessed the independent roles of these two predispositions. We have most often found independent effects of both racism and conservatism on whites' opposition to racial policies, although racism generally has had stronger effects. In this response, I indicate that only a highly selective review of our work would permit such a serious charge. As a general matter, I propose that self-consciously adversarial procedures, along with, rather than solely relying on, the oft-abused ideal of ''value neutrality,'' may best promote credible scientific research on politically controversial topics. I would also urge adherence to consensual standards of evidence, not just in word, but in deed.