Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Fact check: Do liberals or conservatives tend to be more intelligent
Executive Summary
Research does not support a simple answer to whether liberals or conservatives are inherently more intelligent; multiple studies report correlations in different directions, and newer work emphasizes complexity and shared cognitive patterns at political extremes. Some genetic and cognitive studies have found associations between higher measured intelligence and left-leaning beliefs, while other psychological and cultural analyses highlight anti-intellectual trends, malevolent dispositions, or similar cognitive rigidity on both far-left and far-right, indicating that intelligence cannot be cleanly mapped onto political labels [1] [2] [3] [4] [5].
1. Why one headline says “smarter liberals”: genetic signals and within-family analyses
A May–June 2024 study using polygenic scores reported that within families, measures of genetic predisposition to higher cognitive ability predicted left-wing beliefs, which the authors interpreted as evidence that greater innate cognitive potential can lead to more liberal political orientation; this frames a causal story from genetics to ideology rather than vice versa [1] [2]. The study’s emphasis on within-family comparisons attempts to control for shared environment, yet the authors acknowledge socioeconomic and environmental confounds that can shape both measured intelligence and political exposure, so the genetic correlation is important but not determinative [2].
2. Not so fast: cognitive ability and political behavior show mixed patterns
Other registered-report research complicates the picture by showing that cognitive ability relates to political animosity differently across the spectrum, with some findings that higher cognitive ability predicts greater political hostility among liberals but not conservatives, and that cognitive reflection tasks do not straightforwardly predict political animus [6]. This suggests that intelligence as measured in lab tasks and the propensity to engage in partisan hostility are distinct constructs, and that cognitive skill may correlate with certain political behaviors in context-dependent ways rather than map directly onto ideological labels [6].
3. Recent neuroscience suggests convergence at the extremes, not a simple left-right IQ gap
A October 23, 2025 article summarizing neural-response research reports that people at the far-right and far-left show strikingly similar brain responses and cognitive biases, undermining simplistic narratives that one side is cognitively superior. The piece argues that rigidity and pattern-seeking can appear in different ideological packages, and that observed similarities imply shared cognitive styles at extremes rather than a unidirectional intelligence advantage for either side [3]. This reframes the debate from “who is smarter” to “how do cognitive styles vary across ideological intensity” [3].
4. Psychological traits and accusations of anti‑intellectualism complicate the inference
Recent personality-focused and opinion pieces claim associations between conservative ideology and malevolent dispositions, such as psychopathic traits and low empathy, and critique contemporary conservatism for abandoning intellectual traditions, implying a cultural decline in intellectual rigor among some conservative circles [4] [5]. These claims rely on behavioral and attitudinal measures rather than IQ tests; they may reflect political contexts, selection effects, and partisan agendas. Such findings should be interpreted cautiously because dispositional measures and media critiques can conflate cultural trends with cognitive capacity [4] [5].
5. The perception gap: education, elites, and anti‑intellectual narratives
Opinion pieces warn that academics often equate higher education with intelligence, fostering a perception that liberals (who are overrepresented in higher education) are “smarter” while dismissing ordinary citizens, which in turn fuels claims of anti-intellectualism and political polarization [7]. This dynamic creates a perception gap where differences in educational attainment and cultural capital drive judgments about intelligence more than underlying cognitive ability. Analysts caution that equating credentialism with intellect obscures socioeconomic and motivational factors that shape political affiliation [7].
6. What the evidence cannot show: causation, measurement limits, and shifting politics
Across the cited studies, a recurring limitation is that correlation does not equal simple causation: genetic associations, cognitive-task performance, personality metrics, and cultural critiques each capture different facets of cognition or behavior but none definitively prove that one political group is inherently more intelligent. Measurement constraints—polygenic scores, lab tasks, survey instruments, and opinion essays—each carry biases and contextual dependencies, and political ideologies evolve over time. Thus, claims of a broad intelligence advantage for either liberals or conservatives overreach the available evidence [1] [6] [7].
7. Bottom line for readers: nuance matters and motives shape claims
Putting these threads together, the best-supported conclusion is that there is no simple, uncontested scientific verdict that one broad political group is intrinsically more intelligent than the other; some genetic and cognitive studies find associations favoring left-leaning beliefs, neuroscientific work highlights converging patterns at ideological extremes, and cultural critiques emphasize perception and credentialing effects [1] [3] [2] [4] [7]. Readers should treat single-source headlines skeptically, examine measurement methods, and recognize that political, social, and methodological agendas routinely shape interpretations.