|
About This Author
Come closer.
|
Carrion Luggage #1097537 added September 17, 2025 at 10:52am
Restrictions: None
All Over the Map
This article from Big Think is a few years old now, but I only found it recently:
First issue: the headline. Suppose they take a poll of 100 people. 99 of them say they're extroverts. You're the one self-described introvert. Headline: You're an extrovert. Reality: you're an outlier.
Further, judging by the headline alone, in which direction does the arrow of causality point, if any? Are you the way you are because you live in a certain place? Or do people with a given personality type tend to prefer the place? Or is it just correlation?
You will, of course, have to go to the article to see the maps and graphs and charts and whatnot.
Does where you live have any bearing on the kind of personality you have? Science says yes, and these maps show how.
"Science" says no such thing. One particular branch of science is trying hard to make "yes" happen.
“Psychogeography” is already taken — basically, it’s a fancy term for “walking while moody.” “Geopsychology,” however, is still available. And it sounds just about right to describe the systematic study of regional differences in the distribution of personality traits, especially since those differences do indeed seem to be “robust.”
Already, I can see a problem: You live in, say, a place associated with a high degree of emotional stability. But you're in the minority, not very stable at all. Someone who's well-versed in this new "science" (which actually appears to be akin to an actuary in insurance) might assume that you're emotionally stable. You can easily prove them wrong. You might end up in prison for it, though.
The usual caveat applies: None of these traits should be taken in isolation, neither for cause nor effect. Studies — of twins, for instance — show that these characteristics are about equally influenced by nature and nurture.
This sounds like astrology. "Your sun sign should never be taken in isolation. Your personality is also affected by your moon sign, rising sign, the position of the planets relative to each other, etc."
At least they admit that each trait is on a spectrum, not flipped like a coin; that's one of my major issues with INTJ tests.
Also interesting is the finding that while four out of five traits remain stable into old age, “agreeableness” does show variation as subjects get older, showing that people tend to become more compassionate, cooperative, and trusting as they age.
Are you fucking kidding me? Us oldies are cantankerous and grumpy.
On these maps, orange means higher than average, blue means lower. Darker means greater distance from the average.
Oh, good, an explanation of the colors. I thought I was going to have to get grumpy about that, too. Still, would it have killed them to put a legend on the graphics themselves?
The article goes into more details of the geographic distribution. It is, I must emphasize, mostly limited to the contiguous US. There's also a quick overview of the UK at the end. I'd be curious to see data for other countries.
Do I trust it? No. Does it show promise? Maybe. Is it useful? Eh, I don't know. It's like calling anyone from Gen-X a slacker. Sure, many of us are, and I, for one, have embraced that description. But how much of that is actually me (I was a damn hard worker when I was younger), and how much is a self-fulfilling prophecy? |
© Copyright 2025 Robert Waltz (UN: cathartes02 at Writing.Com). All rights reserved.
Robert Waltz has granted InkSpot.Com, its affiliates and its syndicates non-exclusive rights to display this work. |
