Let me begin by saying that my post has virtually nothing to do with the study Mr. Saletan is discussing. I have not read that study, and therefore cannot comment upon its merits or demerits.

However, while reading Mr. Saletan's article, I did come across his link to the previous study he cited--the 2003 meta-analysis published in Psychological Bulletin. Now, I do consider myself well-read in meta-analysis, and reasonably well read in personality psychology (and, more broadly, the area known as "individual differences"). I therefore spent some time perusing the 2003 study.

To put it in layperson's terms (and succinctly), that study, which was a quantitative review of numerous existing studies, concluded that conservatism is associated with several rather undesirable traits.

As the authors of the study acknowledge, more experimental studies are needed, because they are the only way to conclusively demonstrate causation. One cannot make causal conclusions via a correlational study--or, in this case, via a cumulation of correlational studies. Thus, for example, based on these data one cannot conclude that Person X is conservative because he/she is not open to experience or because he/she dislikes ambiguity.

Yet, it is appropriate to conclude from these data that, ceteris paribus, a person who is not open to experience, who dislikes ambiguity, etc., is more likely to be conservative than not.

I should add that the method section of the paper appeared to be fairly standard for a meta-analysis (in the sense that it did seem pretty rigorous). Moreover, some of the authors are top-notch researchers (and the others may be good too--I'm just not familiar with them), and Psychological Bulletin is among the top journals in psychology. I am, therefore, skeptical that this is a politically motivated screed. Although Mr. Saletan might find the conclusions of the 2003 study distasteful, I think he will be unable to criticize the methods used--or at least to do so on legitimate scientific grounds.

[Full Disclosure: For what it's worth, I have a PhD in psychology and am currently a faculty member at a doctoral program in the mid-Atlantic U.S. In terms of politics, I would describe myself as relatively liberal.]