Most biased political compass questions

[nclib]

A lot of the political compass questions tend to favor a liberal response and others tend to favor a conservative response.

Which questions do you think the vast majority would have given a liberal answer and ditto for conservative?

I'd say:

Questions eliciting a liberal response:

It's natural for children to keep some secrets from their parents. (Yes)

Because corporations cannot be trusted to voluntarily protect the environment, they require regulation. (Yes)


Questions eliciting a conservative response:

Land shouldn't be a commodity to be bought and sold. (No)

There are no savage and civilised peoples; there are only different cultures. (No)

[Jake]

Yeah, I tend to take the compass with a grain of salt. I'm definitely more populist than the test makes me seem and the questions tend to be worded either to confuse you or to lead you to an answer. Your examples illustrate this perfectly.

[angus]

A lot of the political compass questions tend to favor a liberal response and others tend to favor a conservative response.

Which questions do you think the vast majority would have given a liberal answer and ditto for conservative?

I'd say:

Questions eliciting a liberal response

It's natural for children to keep some secrets from their parents. (Yes)

Because corporations cannot be trusted to voluntarily protect the environment, they require regulation. (Yes)


Questions eliciting a conservative response

Land shouldn't be a commodity to be bought and sold. (No)

There are no savage and civilised peoples; there are only different cultures. (No)

I'd agree with the first three of the four, but I disagree on the last one.  then again, I never claimed to be more conservative than you.

Yes, there are biases on this quiz, but that's not its fundamental problem.  Still, as a basis for comparing, on a bi-ordinate scale, the relative positions of posters, it's not bad, given that most scales are either one-dimensional, or that among those two dimensional scales, most either give labels (meaningless), or they are much more abbreviated (e.g., the Libertarian Quiz).  I often put down this test, mostly as an overcompensatory, or reactionary, measure to try to alleviate the problem of posters taking this little test too seriously (Nelson Mandela and I have almost exactly the same score, but I doubt we would have voted for the same candidate in 2004 if we were both registered US voters, for example), but still, among the quizes I've seen, this at least offers enough detail that we may compare ourselves in a relative way.

Sure, there's bias.  but then there's always bias.  (Now that's cynical!)  Perhaps the poster who offered to devise a truly objective multimensional (economic domestic, "wedge" domestic, foreign policy, etc.) scale will be forthcoming with that one.  Goddamn, was that me?  sh**t, It might have been.  I hope not.  I really don't have the time or inclination for that.  If it wasn't me, who was it and when is he gonna come up with that mega-quiz?

[Gabu]

These are particularly bad:

"Our race has many superior qualities, compared with other races." (liberal response expected - the implication is that if you disagree, you're a racist)

"If economic globalisation is inevitable, it should primarily serve humanity rather than the interests of trans-national corporations." (liberal response expected - disagreeing is akin to saying that you don't care about humanity)

"Governments should penalise businesses that mislead the public." (liberal response expected - who would say no?)

"Those who are able to work, and refuse the opportunity, should not expect society's support." (conservative response expected - this question is meant to be about welfare, but it's extremely badly worded)

"A significant advantage of a one-party state is that it avoids all the arguments that delay progress in a democratic political system." (liberal response expected - agreeing is akin to saying that you're in favor of dictators)

"Abstract art that doesn't represent anything shouldn't be considered art at all." (not really biased, I just have no idea why the hell this is even in the test)

"Some people are naturally unlucky." (see above)

[Hatman 🍁]

If you haven't noticed, they do change the questions over time. I had printed them a couple years ago, and when i went to check them out a few weeks ago, I had noticed many of the questions were reworded- many to eliminate bias.

[CARLHAYDEN]

A lot of the political compass questions tend to favor a liberal response and others tend to favor a conservative response.

Which questions do you think the vast majority would have given a liberal answer and ditto for conservative?

I'd say:

Questions eliciting a liberal response:

It's natural for children to keep some secrets from their parents. (Yes)

Because corporations cannot be trusted to voluntarily protect the environment, they require regulation. (Yes)


Questions eliciting a conservative response:

Land shouldn't be a commodity to be bought and sold. (No)

There are no savage and civilised peoples; there are only different cultures. (No)

Its not only how the questions are phrased, but what questions are asked the impact the bottom line results.

[7,052,770]

"Governments should penalise businesses that mislead the public." (liberal response expected - who would say no?)

I imagine a lot of people said no to that one.

The land question is crazy, and "the freer the market, the freer the people" seems to entice you to agree.
The astrology question is pretty pointless.

[Ebowed]

They actually think that responding "agree" to that astrology question is conservative!  They've made the mistake of equating conservatism with foolish occultism and astrology.

[angus]

The astrology question is pretty pointless.

I thought so too.  or at least unrelated.

I was totally into horoscopes when I was a raging socialist, and am still into horoscopes as a left-wing republican.  My sister, on the other hand, who is a genuine conservative by most measures, and a Kerry supporter to boot, is also into horoscopes.  I see no relevant correlation of horoscope to either Liberal vs Conservative, Left vs Right, or Bush vs Kerry (and all those categories are different and shouldn't be confused).

Still, among the tests recommended on this forum, it offers one of the better means of comparing ourselves within the artificial separation of economic and "social" issues.  I say artificial because I think the distinction is largely artificial.  If you're the stay-at-home partner in a homosexual relationship, for example, gay marriage may take on a much more economic nature.  If you're the unemployed mother of three already, and pregnant, then maintaining the option of terminating a pregnancy is rather economic as well.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The astrology question is pretty pointless.

I thought so too.  or at least unrelated.

I was totally into horoscopes when I was a raging socialist, and am still into horoscopes as a left-wing republican.  My sister, on the other hand, who is a genuine conservative by most measures, and a Kerry supporter to boot, is also into horoscopes.  I see no relevant correlation of horoscope to either Liberal vs Conservative, Left vs Right, or Bush vs Kerry (and all those categories are different and shouldn't be confused).

Still, among the tests recommended on this forum, it offers one of the better means of comparing ourselves within the artificial separation of economic and "social" issues.  I say artificial because I think the distinction is largely artificial.  If you're the stay-at-home partner in a homosexual relationship, for example, gay marriage may take on a much more economic nature.  If you're the unemployed mother of three already, and pregnant, then maintaining the option of terminating a pregnancy is rather economic as well.

Strongly diagree with everything gives 0.00 economic, -4.36 social.
I then did the same and choose strongly agree to astrology. 0.00 economic, -3.90 social. Assuming that the equation is linear, we get that believing in astrology can make yo up to 0.46 more socially conservative.

[Hatman 🍁]

The astrology question is pretty pointless.

I thought so too.  or at least unrelated.

I was totally into horoscopes when I was a raging socialist, and am still into horoscopes as a left-wing republican.  My sister, on the other hand, who is a genuine conservative by most measures, and a Kerry supporter to boot, is also into horoscopes.  I see no relevant correlation of horoscope to either Liberal vs Conservative, Left vs Right, or Bush vs Kerry (and all those categories are different and shouldn't be confused).

Still, among the tests recommended on this forum, it offers one of the better means of comparing ourselves within the artificial separation of economic and "social" issues.  I say artificial because I think the distinction is largely artificial.  If you're the stay-at-home partner in a homosexual relationship, for example, gay marriage may take on a much more economic nature.  If you're the unemployed mother of three already, and pregnant, then maintaining the option of terminating a pregnancy is rather economic as well.

Strongly diagree with everything gives 0.00 economic, -4.36 social.
I then did the same and choose strongly agree to astrology. 0.00 economic, -3.90 social. Assuming that the equation is linear, we get that believing in astrology can make yo up to 0.46 more socially conservative.

That makes sense, as it is sort of like religion, as in it deals with the unknown or whatever. Usually, the more likely you are to blindly follow a religion the more likely you are to being authoritarian on the axis. It's kinda weird, because as you said there are liberal-wing nuts who are into astrology. Dont know...

[Alcon]

There is a large set of questions that I find politically irrelevant. Most of them relate to personal beliefs, rather than policy. Believing in an eye for an eye isn't really politically authoritarian; in fact, it could not enter politics at all, in theory.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The abortion one is pretty bad IIRC

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

That makes sense, as it is sort of like religion, as in it deals with the unknown or whatever. Usually, the more likely you are to blindly follow a religion the more likely you are to being authoritarian on the axis. It's kinda weird, because as you said there are liberal-wing nuts who are into astrology. Dont know...

Most of the liberals I know are not into astrology. Maybe it's really more of a socially conservative thing.

[Ebowed]

That makes sense, as it is sort of like religion, as in it deals with the unknown or whatever. Usually, the more likely you are to blindly follow a religion the more likely you are to being authoritarian on the axis. It's kinda weird, because as you said there are liberal-wing nuts who are into astrology. Dont know...

Most of the liberals I know are not into astrology. Maybe it's really more of a socially conservative thing.

I think the astrology question doesn't fit as either conservative or liberal.  When was the last time you met a conservative Christian who's into astrology?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I think the astrology question doesn't fit as either conservative or liberal.  When was the last time you met a conservative Christian who's into astrology?

Bad question, I tend to stay away from those people.

[Hatman 🍁]

That makes sense, as it is sort of like religion, as in it deals with the unknown or whatever. Usually, the more likely you are to blindly follow a religion the more likely you are to being authoritarian on the axis. It's kinda weird, because as you said there are liberal-wing nuts who are into astrology. Dont know...

Most of the liberals I know are not into astrology. Maybe it's really more of a socially conservative thing.

Well, most liberals arent into astrology but does that mean most astrologists aren't Liberal?

[patrick1]

The whole quiz is a steamy pile of excrement IMO.  Just because I am not sold on the beneficence of large corporations I get bumped too far towards the left axis.  I'm a free trader but I do not trust corporations nor the gov't.

[Blue Rectangle]

I have two major complaints about he quiz:
--Absolutes.  An absolute should almost always receive a "disagree" because few people are absolutists on any given issue.
Examples:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

How about:
"It is very difficult for first-generation immigrants to integrated into their new country."
and
"Ultimately, what is good for corporations is good for us all."

--Double negatives.  Disagreeing with a negative does not necessarily mean you agree with the corresponding positive.
Example:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Why not: "The government should mandate classroom attendance by schoolchildren."

jfern's point about an all-disagree answer set not giving 0,0 is a good one.  The questions should be balanced such that all-disagree, all-agree or all-random gives 0,0.

As for biasing individual questions, this could easily be corrected for with a weighting system.  For example, an outrageous question (like the racial superiority question) might generate the "Left" answer 95% of the time and the "Right" answer 5% of the time.  With weighting, the Left answer would move your score only slightly Left, but the Right answer would move you far to the Right.  This also allows the quiz to adapt over time, as a running average would continually balance out biases in the questions.  In addition, a similar scheme could be used to keep the average score at 0,0.

[A18]

This is not a double negative:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And this would be the opposite:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[12th Doctor]

There are no savage and civilised peoples; there are only different cultures. (No)

Acctually, I answered "Yes" to this question.  I don't see Bin Laden or the Iranian radicals as being the representatives of Islamic culture, nor any of the dictators who riegn over the middle east.

[A18]

Then you should have voted no

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Female circumcision is why I will always answer Strongly Disagree to that one.

[jokerman]

The whole quiz is a steamy pile of excrement IMO.  Just because I am not sold on the beneficence of large corporations I get bumped too far towards the left axis.  I'm a free trader but I do not trust corporations nor the gov't.

The Vosem Chart would be better for you.  I seperates into fiscal and coporate axises.  You would probably end up as a Anarcho-Syndicalist or a Paleo-Conservative.

[Blue Rectangle]

This is not a double negative:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You're right, it's not technically a double negative, but the statement contains one negative and a disagreement provides the other, which makes it awkward.  This statement is the worst:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Instead of "should not be excluded from", why not "should be allowed to"?

And this would be the opposite:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Not exactly.  You can support some third way or a compromise between the statement and the opposite of the statement.  Thus, you might be opposed to both the statement and its opposite.

Another problem is the double statement:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

What does disagree mean? That we're not going too far (libertarian), or that it's not fine for society to be open about sex (authoritarian)?