Scientists discover that less intelligent people voted for Brexit
Scientists discover that less intelligent people voted for Brexit
New scientific research has found that less intelligent people were more likely to vote for Brexit. According to a new study, people who voted for the leave campaign are more likely to have had lower cognitive abilities.This may have made them more susceptible to disinformation, the authors of the s...
indy100.com Scientists discover that less intelligent people voted for Brexit Harry Fletcher ~2 minutes
New scientific research has found that less intelligent people were more likely to vote for Brexit.
According to a new study, people who voted for the leave campaign are more likely to have had lower cognitive abilities.
This may have made them more susceptible to disinformation, the authors of the study claim.
The new research comes from the University of Bath. As the study found, 73 per cent of the UK voters in the top 10 per cent of cognitive performance were remain voters.
Only 40 per cent of the people in the bottom 10 per cent of cognitive performance voted to remain in the EU.
The findings were published in the academic journal PLOS One are were based on analysis of 3,181 couples in the UK from an longitudinal study called Understanding Society.
iStock
The study was led by authors Chris Dawson and Paul Baker. The pair claim that the findings show “low cognitive ability makes people more susceptible to misinformation and disinformation”.
The pair list the rhetoric from leave campaign leaders claiming that the UK would be able to “take back control of our borders” as an example of disinformation, as well as the claim about the £350m Brexit windfall being used to fund the NHS.
Speaking to the Times, Dawson said: “It’s an uncomfortable thing to say, but I think it’s important to be said. We have increasing amounts of fake news and it’s getting more and more sophisticated.”
Sign up for our free Indy100 weekly newsletter
How to join the indy100's free WhatsApp channel
Have your say in our news democracy. Click the upvote icon at the top of the page to help raise this article through the indy100 rankings
If there is a flaw in democracy, that's probably it. A stupid person's vote is worth the same as an intelligent person's.
Hypothetically, if Lemmy analyzed your posts and comments for intelligence (without telling you your score, to avoid drama) and then weighted your up/downvotes accordingly, would that be cool with you?
Gotta be honest with you, I'd like to know for sure.
Think of how dumb the average person is and realise half of them are dumber than that.
Then consider how much bias you're putting into your perspective.
Anyone can be stupid. Even the smartest people in the world are stupid some of the time. Especially when the kind of culture we've built requires that people hyper-specialize in their field, so most people are rarely truly intelligent outside that field.
The problem is that we haven't made critical thinking a priority, and those who seek to exploit voters have made it their mission that we never do.
I expected some Carlin and I got some
The study assertion is funny, but I don't really think it's worth much in terms of proving anything.
The number of participants being 6,000 seems promising, but I question the value of the questions they asked.
Recall 10 words read to you immediately and then again after the interview.
Name as many animals as possible in an elotted amount of time.
Subtract 7 from 100. Then again. Up to five times.
Solve the missing numbers in two number sequences.
Answer 5 math word problems.
Depending on what mental state you're in, whether you're recently off work, high, coming back from a run, etc. I think you're likely to have dramatically different test scores from these.
Furthermore, these seem much more relevant to the education quality of an individual - and they call it "cognitive performance" (how good you think at the time) in the study which is kind of correct, but the article is passing it off as the participants' intelligence (how good you think period), which is fucked up IMO.
I overall don't like it and don't find it that persuasive.
Quite the surprise..
Aren't votes supposed to be anonymous?
They were the majority and they had the right to vote for themselves. If they thought Europe was a sinking ship (even before the recent wars at its borders) and decided to jump away before drowning, that seems legit.
if they thought
You mean “if they were made to think”. They didn’t suddenly have this brilliant idea en masse that EU is a sinking ship. They were fed that horseshit over years by liars and grifters and scumbags.