Why do we vote the way we do? An explanation from the behavioral sciences.

What's your bias? This is the main question in the book by English political psychologist and neuroscientist Lee De-Wit, aiming to understand the science behind why we vote the way we do.

We wanted, from the Detox Information Project, to bring you five key elements when asking ourselves this question, and why, for this flagship project of ETHOS BT, which utilizes behavioral sciences, innovation, and communication to reduce our vulnerability to misinformation and polarization in Colombia, it is a matter of enormous relevance.

Our political stance is not fixed. Just as our personality changes throughout our lives, so too can our political position. We may always prefer to see ourselves as objective and free from biases or judgments, but as we will see in this article, we are far from being so, especially in moments when we make decisions linked to politics.

1. The Morality of What Is Just: De-Wit mentions that many political arguments end up being related to the "morality of what is just, as our moral values shape our political stances and, consequently, the way we vote." Our concepts of justice, fairness, or loyalty are reflected in our decisions when choosing a candidate. (To delve deeper into this concept, we recommend the book "The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion" by Jonathan Haidt, a social psychologist and professor of ethical leadership at the NYU Stern School of Business, based on his Moral Foundations Theory).

2. The Concept of Authority and Group Loyalty: According to Haidt, these two factors help us understand why we see things so differently based on our political position. Haidt and his colleagues found, for example, that those who identify as conservatives are more likely to support the concept that "Loyalty to a group is more important than individual concerns," while those who identify as liberals emphasize two moral values: justice and protecting others from harm. In the words of this scholar, "our politics are groupish, not selfish."

3. How We Understand Risk: According to a group of researchers led by Darren Schreiber from the University of Exeter, UK, and the findings of their study on how the brains of liberals and conservatives differ when presented with a risk scenario, they were able to confirm that conservatives have a different cognitive process when thinking about risk situations, making them more sensitive to potential threats. Therefore, as De-Wit points out, "if we have a higher sensitivity to threat, we can naturally see the world as a dangerous place, so we might be prioritizing values such as group loyalty and respect for authority," in addition to wanting to protect the status quo.

4. OCEAN Model or the Big Five: Based on psychologists' recognition that people have five personality traits that can help explain how we respond in different situations, in the 1980s, psychologist Lewis Goldberg coined the term the Big Five to describe the most important ways in which our personality can differ. These five traits help us understand how a liberal thinks, different from a conservative. For example, the aspect in which they differ the most is Openness to new experiences. Liberals tend to respond more positively to change and uncertainty. Another aspect in which they differ is in Conscientiousness: conservatives have this trait higher, so they may be more diligent and careful, with a high respect for convention and tradition.

• O (Openness to new experiences): Open-mindedness/openness to experience;

• C (Conscientiousness): Responsibility;

• E (Extraversion): Energy/Extraversion;

• A (Agreeableness): Affability/Amiability;

• N (Neuroticism): Emotional Stability/Instability.

1. We Are Not the Rational Creatures We Believe We Are: We are driven by a series of cognitive biases that can make us resistant to certain facts or reasons. We bring four biases related to politics that make us believe that we, or our group, are right:

• Cognitive Dissonance: We want to feel that we are consistent and that we seek consistency in our lives through our belief system, so we lie to ourselves to avoid things we do not want to confront because it makes us uncomfortable. For example, in 2016, Gyles Brandreth, a former member of the British Parliament for the Conservative Party, conducted an experiment in which he asked about various topics related to tax management, healthcare, and education, among others. When those who responded (all conservative) realized they had agreed with proposals from the Labour Party (left-wing), they felt uncomfortable and horrified. As Lee De-Wit notes, "the mere thought that they might agree with the other side was an unpleasant surprise."

• Confirmation Bias: It is the tendency we have to seek evidence that is consistent with our ideas or values and reject or discredit evidence contrary to our beliefs.

• Cognitive Motivation: "It is similar to confirmation bias, but it is not just a cognitive bias. It is deeply related to our emotions, values, and identity."

• Halo Effect: It is the tendency we have to assume that people who are more attractive are also more intelligent. In a study conducted in Finland, people were asked to rate faces according to their "beauty," and it was discovered that candidates identified as more beautiful received 20% more votes (Berggren, N., Jordahl, H., & Poutvaara, P. - 2010).

If this article has sparked your curiosity about your biases when making political decisions, we invite you to learn about the DIP tools so you can know more about your vulnerability to misinformation and polarization.

Written by: Natalia Riveros Anzola, Manager of Alliances and Strategic Communications, ETHOS BT