PittsburghLIVE carried an article about the Berkeley study on conservativism.
A snippet from the article:
Anyway, Jack Glaser, one of the lead authors of the Berkeley study, acknowledged in a media release that a study focused solely on why right wingers aren't right in the head might seem “partisan.” But, he explained, there is a “host” of information available about conservatism and comparatively little about liberalism.
But why, exactly, haven't they studied why people are liberal? Perhaps it's because the profession thinks it's “abnormal” to be a conservative in the first place.
After all, psychiatrists study why people murder or why some people believe they're Napoleon or why they think Carrot Top is funny. But they don't study people who take showers. Why? Because taking a shower is normal, and therefore uninteresting. Perhaps it says something interesting about a profession that sees conservatism as so abnormal so as to be worth studying.
If you go back and look at the list of characteristics that define conservatism, you'll discover that it applies to liberals, too. Fear of ambiguity, a desire of cognitive closure, etc: These are human traits, not conservative ones.