Extreme Bias Among College Professors

You should take the time to read this analysis:

In this article I offer new evidence about something readers of Academic Questions already know: The political registration of full-time, Ph.D.-holding professors in top-tier liberal arts colleges is overwhelmingly Democratic. Indeed, faculty political affiliations at 39 percent of the colleges in my sample are Republican free—having zero Republicans. The political registration in most of the remaining 61 percent, with a few important exceptions, is slightly more than zero percent but nevertheless absurdly skewed against Republican affiliation and in favor of Democratic affiliation. Thus, 78.2 percent of the academic departments in my sample have either zero Republicans, or so few as to make no difference.

Interestingly enough, the Extreme Bias is found in fields outside of the hard sciences:

Some STEM fields come close to the baseline national average of 1.6:1; potentially ideologically linked fields, especially the interdisciplinary studies fields, do not. Thus, the D:R ratio for engineering is 1.6:1 while for the interdisciplinary studies fields it is 108:0.

This bias outside of the STEM fields is so extreme that the default assumption concerning these non-STEM fields should be skepticism.  That is, unless I have good, independent reason to think otherwise, my working assumptions about social scientists and other PhD’s from the humanities is that they are not true scholars; they are highly skilled ideologues, trained through intellectual inbreeding where peer review becomes more akin to the encouragement of ideological purity rather than truth.

There is more to flesh out from the Extreme Bias in academia when I get the time.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in academia, confirmation bias, Culture, Uncategorized and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Extreme Bias Among College Professors

  1. FZM says:

    The psychology professor Jonathan Haidt has been working on this subject for a while now, he and some colleagues set up the ‘Heterodox Academy’ project: https://heterodoxacademy.org/

    There is a really interesting discussion between Haidt and Jordan Peterson about the same subject. I think I found it via Peterson’s YouTube channel.

  2. TFBW says:

    That is, unless I have good, independent reason to think otherwise, my working assumptions about social scientists and other PhD’s from the humanities is that they are not true scholars; they are highly skilled ideologues

    If you don’t have this working assumption, you are seriously misreading the situation. One of the major themes discussed by Jonathan Haidt (as mentioned by FZM, above), is the distinction between universities which have “Truth” as their ideal, versus those who have “Change” as their ideal. It used to be that you could take the former ideal for granted, but these days the latter has become more the norm — although the universities themselves are not wont to be candid about it. These agents of Change are likely to be sceptics of Truth, considering it to be a mere question of who gets to assert their truth, rather than truth as an objective thing to be discovered.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.