Random actor placement makes personality study more rather than less necessary

Evidence

Even if the first of the reservations sometimes expressed about the value of studying personality and politics—the claim that individuals are randomly distributed in political roles and therefore their impact is somewhat neutralized—is empirically sound, it is by no means a reason not to study personality and politics. If one visualizes political processes as analogous to intricately wired computers, political actors can be viewed as key junctures in the wiring, for example circuit breakers. If anything, it would be more, not less, urgent to know the performance characteristics of the circuit breakers if their operating properties were random, with some capable of tripping at inappropriate times, losing valuable information, and others failing to trip, exposing the system to the danger of meltdown. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 1132

Categorization

• CANDY: The circuit-breaker counterargument is pleasantly counterintuitive and shippable on its own.
• XREF: connects to: Randomly distributed actor traits make studying them more, not less, urgent — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 1132; Random personality placement in roles makes personality study more urgent, not less.; Random role assignment still produces self-stereotyping that fits the role (+1 more)

Broader Connections

• Randomly distributed actor traits make studying them more, not less, urgent #corroborates (0.97) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 1132
• Random personality placement in roles makes personality study more urgent, not less. #corroborates (0.97)
• Random role assignment still produces self-stereotyping that fits the role #expands (0.75)
• Apparent personality traits often reflect attempts to conform to local norms #qualifies (0.72) — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 1936