The Science Behind Political Identity

The Core Insight

Why Good People Disagree

One of the most important insights from political psychology is that political disagreement isn't primarily about facts or intelligence—it's about values. People with different political views often aren't working from different information; they're weighing competing values differently.

"If you really want to open your mind, open your heart first. If you can have at least one friendly interaction with a member of the 'other' group, you'll find it far easier to listen to what they're saying."
— Jonathan Haidt, The Righteous Mind

Psychologist Jonathan Haidt's work demonstrates that moral and political intuitions come first, and reasoning follows. We don't reason our way to political conclusions—we intuit them based on deep-seated values, then construct arguments to justify what we already feel. This isn't a flaw; it's how human moral psychology works.

The Implication

Understanding this changes how we approach political disagreement. Your opponents aren't stupid or evil—they're likely prioritizing different values than you are. A productive conversation requires understanding which values they're prioritizing, not just which policies they support.

This is why Political DNA maps your position across multiple dimensions rather than placing you on a single left-right line. Different combinations of values produce different political worldviews—32 distinct strains in our framework—that can't be reduced to "liberal" or "conservative."

Go Deeper: Why We Disagree

Want to understand the psychology of political disagreement in more depth? Our forthcoming guide explores moral foundations, motivated reasoning, and what research reveals about bridging political divides. Coming soon.

Political Science

Beyond Left vs. Right

The simple left-right spectrum has dominated political discussion for over two centuries. But research consistently shows this single dimension fails to capture how people actually think about politics.

"A unidimensional model of ideology provides an incomplete basis for the study of political ideology. Two dimensions—economic and social ideology—are the minimum needed to account for domestic policy preferences. More importantly, the determinants of these two ideological dimensions are vastly different."
— Feldman & Johnston, Political Psychology, 2014

Factor analysis of political attitudes consistently reveals that economic views (taxes, regulation, redistribution) and social views (religion, gender, tradition) are separate dimensions. You can be economically left but socially right, or vice versa—and millions of people are.

The Globalization Cleavage

Recent research has identified a third major dimension: attitudes toward globalization. Kriesi and colleagues found that globalization creates "winners" (educated, mobile, urban) and "losers" (less educated, place-bound, rural) whose political attitudes don't fit neatly into traditional left-right categories. This explains why you can find both left-wing and right-wing skeptics of free trade, and both left-wing and right-wing cosmopolitans.

Our four-dimensional model synthesizes this research:

Personal Liberty PLCF

Individual freedom vs. collective security and order. How much should people be free to make their own choices, even risky ones?

Economic System MESR

Free markets vs. state intervention. Should the economy be driven by competition or coordination?

National vs. Global DIPG

Sovereignty vs. international integration. Where do your primary loyalties and obligations lie?

Cultural Values CULT

Traditional vs. progressive. Should society preserve inherited institutions or embrace social change?

These four dimensions are largely independent—your position on one doesn't predict your position on another. This is why traditional labels like "liberal" and "conservative" obscure more than they reveal.

Go Deeper: The History of Left and Right

The terms "left" and "right" emerged from a specific historical moment—the French Revolution—and the single-spectrum framework has dominated political thinking ever since. Our forthcoming guide traces how this framework evolved, why it persists despite its limitations, and what it misses about modern politics. Coming soon.

Belief Structure

How Political Beliefs Hang Together

In 1964, political scientist Philip Converse published a landmark study showing that most citizens don't have highly structured ideological belief systems. Unlike political elites, ordinary people often hold views that seem inconsistent from an ideological perspective.

"Large portions of an electorate simply do not have meaningful beliefs, even on issues that have formed the basis for intense political controversy among elites for substantial periods of time."
— Philip Converse, "The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics," 1964

This finding has been replicated many times. Most people don't reason from abstract principles to specific policies. Instead, they form attitudes on each issue somewhat independently, based on group loyalties, personal experiences, and how issues are framed.

What This Means for You

If your beliefs don't fit neatly into standard ideological categories, you're not confused—you're normal. Our "Political Paradoxes" feature specifically identifies combinations of views that seem contradictory from a conventional perspective but may reflect thoughtful engagement with complex tradeoffs.

That said, beliefs aren't random. Research shows that attitudes cluster in predictable ways based on underlying values and psychological predispositions. Our 32 political strains represent distinct patterns of belief that actually occur in modern democracies.

Psychology

Personality and Political Orientation

Research consistently finds correlations between basic personality traits and political views. Two traits from the "Big Five" personality model show the strongest relationships:

Openness to Experience: People high in openness—who enjoy novelty, variety, and unconventional ideas—tend to hold more liberal views. Those lower in openness, who prefer familiarity and tradition, tend toward conservatism. This is one of the most robust findings in political psychology.
Conscientiousness: People high in conscientiousness—organized, dutiful, and rule-following—tend to be more conservative, particularly on social issues. The relationship is weaker than with openness but still significant across studies.

Important caveat: these are statistical tendencies, not deterministic rules. Personality creates predispositions, not destinies. Many highly open people are conservative, and many conscientious people are liberal.

Threat Sensitivity

Some research suggests that sensitivity to threat—both physical and social—predicts conservative attitudes on issues related to security, order, and tradition. People who perceive more danger in the world may be drawn to political positions that emphasize protection and stability. But this doesn't mean conservatives are "fearful"—it may reflect accurate assessments of different life circumstances.

Origins

Where Political Beliefs Come From

Political beliefs emerge from a complex mix of factors. Research points to several key influences:

Family socialization: Parents transmit political values to children, though the effect weakens as children encounter diverse perspectives in adulthood.
Life experiences: Education, economic circumstances, geographic mobility, and personal relationships all shape political views.
Group identity: People often adopt political views associated with groups they identify with—religious communities, professional circles, regional cultures.
Historical context: The same personality might lead to different politics in different eras. A novelty-seeker in 1960 and 2024 would encounter very different "established orders" to challenge.
Media environment: The information sources people consume shape which issues they care about and how they understand them.

Twin studies suggest that genetics play some role—identical twins raised apart show more similar political views than fraternal twins. But this doesn't mean there's a "liberal gene" or "conservative gene." Rather, genes influence personality traits and cognitive styles that then interact with environment to produce political attitudes.

The Bottom Line

Political beliefs are neither purely chosen nor purely determined. They emerge from the interaction of temperament, experience, social context, and reflection. This is why people can and do change their political views over time—but also why those views feel so deeply "right" to us.

Go Deeper: How Political Views Change

Do people actually change their political beliefs? Research says yes—but not the way you might think. Our forthcoming guide explores life events, generational shifts, and the psychology of political change. Coming soon.

Questions

Frequently Asked Questions

Does this mean my political views are predetermined?

No. Research shows that personality and other factors create tendencies, not destinies. People change their political views throughout life based on experiences, relationships, and reflection. The science explains why change can be difficult, not why it's impossible.

Why do I sometimes agree with "the other side"?

Because most people aren't pure ideologues. Research shows that political attitudes are multidimensional—you might be liberal on some issues and conservative on others. Our 32 strains are designed to capture these mixed profiles that single-axis models miss.

Are liberals or conservatives more rational?

Neither. Research shows that motivated reasoning—bending evidence to fit preexisting beliefs—affects people across the political spectrum equally. We're all prone to confirmation bias when our identities and values are at stake.

Can understanding this science reduce political conflict?

Potentially. Understanding that your opponents are prioritizing different values—not ignoring evidence or acting in bad faith—can make productive conversation more possible. Whether this actually reduces conflict at scale is an open empirical question.

How does Political DNA relate to academic research?

Our four-dimensional model draws on established research in political science and psychology, particularly work on multidimensional ideology (Feldman, Treier & Hillygus), the globalization cleavage (Kriesi), and the GAL-TAN framework from European politics research (Hooghe, Marks). We aim to make these academic insights accessible and personally relevant.

How does Political DNA relate to the World's Smallest Political Quiz?

Political DNA was created by the same person who leads the organization behind the WSPQ. It extends the WSPQ's core insight—that political identity has more than one dimension—from two dimensions to four, and from a simple grid to 32 distinct archetypes. Think of it as the next generation of the same basic idea: that "left" and "right" don't capture how people actually think about politics.

Learn More

The Science

A Note on "Political DNA"