Anger Mediates the Effects of Fear on Support for the Far Right—A Rejoinder

We are grateful to John Jost for carefully engaging with our work and presenting a different interpretation of our findings on the effects of fear and anger stemming from the November 13, 2015, Paris attacks on the propensity to vote for the far right. Jost advances a model that holds that anger mediates the effect of fear on support for the far right. In this rejoinder, we respond to the issues he raises regarding our model specification, consider his alternative suggestion, and offer some conclusions about how to resolve this debate empirically. We hope this exchange advances the literature on the impact of various societal threats on voting for the far right.     

Fear and its vicissitudes

Abstract

The USA has been a changed society since 9/11: the Zeitgeist either has a background of low-level angst, or when an attack occurs or a threat is sounded, the fear peaks and comes to the foreground for a time. Perhaps nothing demonstrates the degree to which fear permeates contemporary culture more than the continual presence of the measures the USA takes to be safe: airport security, the Patriot Act, the mining of formerly private information by the government, to name but a few. Can we account for the pervasive nature of fear solely by the devastating and deadly attacks 15 years ago, unspeakably horrifying though they were? This paper will explore this omnipresent fear in contemporary American culture from a psychoanalytic perspective, and in so doing hopes to shed light on the nature of that fear, why it is so persistent despite 15 years without any sequels, and what the consequences of that fear are for the American way of life. The discussion will be rounded out by linking this pervasive fear to the violence that is endemic to our age.     

Exposure to Online Hate in Four Nations: A Cross-National Consideration

There is a considerable amount of hate material online, but the degree to which individuals are exposed to these materials vary. Using samples of youth and young adults from four countries, we investigate who is exposed to hate materials. We find support for using routine activity theory to understand exposure at the individual level; however, there is significant cross-national variation in exposure after accounting for individual-level factors. We consider two plausible hypotheses that could account for this cross-national variation. The data best fit the hypothesis that anti–hate speech laws may provide a source of guardianship against exposure.     

Fear of victimization in Mexico

The aim of this study was to explore the influence on Mexican citizens of several variables that have been reported as being important in the literature on fear of victimization. Sociodemographic variables such as gender, age group and socioeconomic level, together with perceived risk of victimization, perceived seriousness in the face of different acts, experienced victimizations and perception of control of violence and crime are included among these variables. One hundred and eighty-one people were interviewed in a cross-sectional field study. Multiple regression analyses were carried out in three fear of victimization dimensions: personal, property and general situations. On the whole, the findings confirm the influence of the aforesaid variables. Being a woman, feeling at risk of being the object of violent attacks and the seriousness with which moderately violent acts are perceived were some of the major variables considered to predict fear of victimization.     

Fear Appeals in Political Rhetoric about Terrorism: An Analysis of Speeches by Australian Prime Minister Howard

This paper explores fear-arousing content in Australian former Prime Minister John Howard's political rhetoric about terrorism. We coded 27 speeches delivered between September 2001 and November 2007 for the presence of statements promoting fear-consistent appraisals ( Smith & Lazarus, 1993 ). Fear-arousing content was present in 24 of these speeches, but the amount of fear-arousing content varied markedly. In particular, rhetoric that raised doubts about the capacity of Australia and its allies to cope with terrorism was most strongly present in the lead-up to the invasion of Iraq and at times of declining support for government policies. Textual analysis of three key speeches confirmed a marked difference between Howard's speech given immediately after the attacks on September 11, 2001, and the second and third speeches presented prior to and after the 2003 invasion of Iraq. These findings indicate that Howard has not consistently employed fear-inducing rhetoric in his speeches about terrorism, but that particular speeches appear to take this form, raising the possibility that fear-arousing rhetoric may have been selectively deployed to support his political purposes at those times.     

Media exposure to terrorism and people's risk perception: The role of environmental sensitivity and psychophysiological response to stress

Terrorist attacks have a destabilizing impact on the general population, causing distress and fear. However, not all individuals are equally susceptible to the effects of terror threat. This study aimed to examine whether exposure to terrorism-related pictures interacted with individual differences in environmental sensitivity and psychophysiological response to stress to explain people's risk perception, operationalized as perceived likelihood of a terrorist attack and willingness to trade off one's privacy to increase national security. Ninety-five university students were randomly assigned to one of two conditions (terrorism-related vs. neutral pictures). After watching the pictures, they answered questions concerning risk perception and completed questionnaires. Stress was induced by the Mannheim Multicomponent Stress Test, during which heart rate was recorded. Results showed that the perceived likelihood of future attacks was affected by the interaction between exposure to terrorism pictures and psychophysiological reactivity to stress, whereas willingness to trade off one's privacy to improve national security was influenced by the interaction between exposure to terrorism pictures and environmental sensitivity. The study suggests that individuals high in sensitivity and psychophysiological stress reactivity are particularly affected by terrorism-related pictures. Psychologists should direct their efforts to raise general awareness of the negative effects, especially for some people, of such media coverage.     

Fear,Anger, and Voting for the Far Right: Evidence From the November 13, 2015 Paris Terror Attacks

The conjecture that negative emotions underpin support for far‐right politics is common among pundits and scholars. The conventional account holds that authoritarian populists catalyze public anxiety about the changing social order and/or deteriorating national economic conditions, and this anxiety subsequently drives up support for the far right. We propose that while emotions do indeed play an independent causal role in support for far‐right parties and policies, that support is more likely built upon the public’s anger rather than fear. This article explores the relative impact of fear and anger in reaction to the 2015 Paris terror attacks on the propensity to vote for the French far‐right party, the Front National, in the 2015 regional elections. Contrary to conventional wisdom, we find that anger is associated with voting for the Front National, while fear is associated with voting against the Front National. Moreover, anger boosts the Front National vote most powerfully among far‐right and authoritarian voters. On the other hand, fear reduces support for the far right among those same groups.     

Terrorism's Toll on Civil Liberties

Summary

The toll that terrorism takes on civil liberties has become clear in the United States in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks. Horrendous as those attacks were, they were hardly unique in the fear that they spurred on the part of the politicians and the public, resulting in a counterattack on civil liberties in the name of preventing terrorism. The cost to civil liberties is thus imposed not directly by terrorism itself, but rather by unjustified policies that are labeled “counter-terrorist.” In that sense, this chapter would more aptly be entitled, “Counter-Terrorism's Toll on Civil Liberties.”     

Hate Crime Legislation Reconsidered

In “Is Penalty Enhancement a Sound Idea?” Claudia Card calls into question hate crime legislation, querying whether hatred makes a crime worse, whether hatred of the sort pertinent to hate crimes is worse than a more personal hatred, and whether the message sent by hate crime legislation is the intended message. This essay questions her assumption that penalty enhancement for hate crimes is warranted only if the crimes are worse than otherwise similar crimes that do not count as hate crimes. Instead, it may be the case that it is the proper business of the state to take a particular interest in such crimes, in part because they enact not just any hatred but civic hatred. And if hate crimes are understood as enacting civic hatred, hate crime legislation can indeed serve to counter a message that very much needs to be countered.     

Echoes of the Danish Cartoon Crisis 10 Years Later: Identity,Injury and Intelligibility from Copenhagen to Paris and Texas

ABSTRACT

The tenth anniversary of the Danish cartoon crisis of 2005–06 invites reflection on its historical significance and contemporary relevance. In the Danish context 10 years ago, the events generated substantial debate about issues such as terrorism, immigration, blasphemy and the place of Islam in Denmark and in the Danish folk. Furthermore, they raised complex questions about Danish identity in a society that had become significantly more religiously and culturally diverse in the preceding decades. Most of these questions, however, were eclipsed by the polarized public debate about free speech and religious respect. The year 2015 brought many of these questions back to the fore after the murders that January of 12 journalists at the French satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo and attacks at a kosher market in Paris, followed in February by shootings at a free speech event in Copenhagen and at a synagogue, and later attacks in May at a Muhammad cartoon contest exhibit in Garland, Texas. Despite their disparate contexts, these violent events have echoes of the original Danish cartoon crisis. This article suggests that the three concepts of identity, injury and intelligibility can together help to add complexity to popular interpretations of the original Danish cartoon crisis and recent related events, and prompt us to think beyond the dualistic categories of free speech and blasphemy.     

Predicting the Importance of Freedom of Speech and the Perceived Harm of Hate Speech

Although freedom of speech is a fundamental value in the United States, individuals vary in the importance they place on it. The purpose of this study was to examine personality and attitudinal factors that may influence an individual's judgments of the importance of freedom of speech and, secondarily, the harm of hate speech. As expected, the importance of freedom of speech was positively related to intellect, individualism, separate knowing, and negatively related to right‐wing authoritarianism. Men rated freedom of speech more important than did women. The perceived harm of hate speech was positively related to intellect and liberalism, and women perceived a greater harm of hate speech than did men.     

System Justification and Affective Responses to Terrorism: Evidence from the November 2015 Paris Attacks

A large stream of research has shown that emotional reactions have a powerful impact on political choices and decision-making processes. Yet little is known about individual-level differences in experiencing specific emotions in the light of threatening events. In this article, we argue that system justification, or the endorsement and bolstering of existing social and political arrangements, is positively associated with the experience of positive emotions and negatively associated with the experience of negative emotions in the light of threat. We test our hypotheses using a study conducted a few days after the November 13, 2015, Paris terror attacks on a large sample in France. Our results show that system justification was positively associated with experiencing hope in the light of the attacks and negatively associated with experiencing fear and anger. Moreover, the size of these effects exceeded the respective size of other psychological characteristics such as authoritarianism, conservatism, and national attachment. These findings extend research on the palliative function of system justification to the domain of emotional responses to terrorist shocks.     

Commitment to Connection in a Culture of Fear

SUMMARY

This article was originally presented at the May 2004 Learning from Women Conference sponsored by Harvard Medical School and the Jean Baker Miller Training Institute. It examines the ways in which cultural and personal denial of fear and vulnerability contribute to a sense of isolation. Fear is manipulated in hierarchical settings to ensure the preservation of existing power arrangements. In a culture built on exploitation of fear, people do not experience the safety necessary to let their inevitable vulnerabilities show. Unmitigated chronic fear is an unsafe context that leads to a traumatic sense of disempowerment and personal immobilization, whether it is in war, childhood sexual abuse, living with a battering partner, or, perhaps in a more subtle way, in being immersed in massages of un-safety, danger, and having no influence in the larger public domain. Through mutual empathy we can heal these places of fear and disconnection. Mutual empathy arises in a context of profound respect, authentic responsiveness, humility, non-defensiveness, an attitude of curiosity, mindfulness (staying with the “not knowing”), and an appreciation of the power of learning. Movement out of isolation helps us pass through fear to hope and ultimately leads to growth and more connection.     

条件性恐惧记忆消退返回的性别差异

采用预期判断任务考察男女性对已消退的条件性恐惧记忆是否会出现消退返回的现象。结果表明: (1)在对已习得的条件性恐惧记忆消退后4个小时进行测试, 被试整体会出现明显的消退返回现象; (2)对消退返回现象的性别差异进行比较, 女性比男性的消退返回现象更突出, 并且差异显著; (3)与男性相比, 女性对条件性恐惧记忆具有易习得难消退的趋势, 但是性别差异不显著。研究结果验证了消退返回现象存在的普遍性, 并且有着显著的性别差异, 为以后对创伤后应激障碍患者的治疗应考虑性别因素提供了心理学依据。     

Terror,Terror Everywhere? How Terrorism News Shape Support for Anti‐Muslim Policies as a Function of Perceived Threat Severity and Controllability

Terrorist attacks committed by the so‐called Islamic State are rising in Western countries. How the news media portray these attacks may crucially influence emotional responses and support for anti‐Muslim policies such as immigration bans. Based on the Extended parallel response model (EPRM, Witte, 1992), we theorize that specific features of terrorism news such as threat severity (e.g., high vs. low number of potential terrorist offenders) and threat controllability (e.g., nondiffuse, controllable threat vs. diffuse, uncontrollable threat) influence individuals’ emotional reactions and policy support. A quota‐based online experiment (N = 501) reveals that news articles featuring a high number of offenders increase individuals’ fear of terror irrespective of whether the threat is portrayed as controllable or not. News articles featuring a low number of offenders only evoke fear of terror if the threat is portrayed as diffuse. Additionally, news articles emphasizing a high number of offenders combined with a controllable terrorism threat elicit anger on the government. Both anger and fear of terror subsequently increase anti‐Muslim policy support.     

Americans respond politically to 9/11: understanding the impact of the terrorist attacks and their aftermath

The 9/11 terrorist attacks have had profound effect on U.S. domestic and foreign security policy, leading to several expensive wars and the erosion of civil liberties (under the USA PATRIOT Act). We review evidence on political reactions to the 9/11 attacks and conclude that subjective reactions to terrorism played an important role in shaping support for national security policy in the wake of 9/11. Support for a strong national security policy was most pronounced among Americans who perceived the nation as at threat from terrorism and felt angry at terrorists. In contrast, Americans who were personally affected by the attacks were more likely to feel anxious about terrorism, and this anxiety translated into less support for overseas military action. In addition, Americans who felt insecure after the 9/11 attacks and perceived a high future threat of terrorism were more likely than others to support strong foreign and domestic national security policies. Overall, research on American political reactions to 9/11 suggests that support for a strong government response to terrorism is most likely when members of a population perceive a high risk of future terrorism and feel angry at terrorists.     

Anger and Authoritarianism Mediate the Effects of Fear on Support for the Far Right—What Vasilopoulos et al. (2019) Really Found

In an important study of popular support for the National Front following the November 13, 2015 terrorist attacks in France, Vasilopoulos, Marcus, Valentino, and Foucault (2019) argue that (1) anger—rather than fear—explains support for the Far Right and (2) the effect of fear on support for the Far Right is negative, rather than positive, as previous work (including my own) would suggest. However, these conclusions are based on statistical models that adjust for anger (but no other emotional variables) when investigating the effects of fear, and the results indicate the presence of a suppression effect. Following a collegial exchange with the authors, I share evidence (which they provided) that (1) the effect of fear on support for the Far Right is in fact positive and significant (rather than negative) and (2) anger and authoritarianism both mediate the effect of fear on support for the Far Right. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.     

Empathy, Ways of Knowing, and Interdependence as Mediators of Gender Differences in Attitudes Toward Hate Speech and Freedom of Speech

Women are more intolerant of hate speech than men. This study examined relationality measures as mediators of gender differences in the perception of the harm of hate speech and the importance of freedom of speech. Participants were 107 male and 123 female college students. Questionnaires assessed the perceived harm of hate speech, the importance of freedom of speech, empathy, relational and collective interdependence, and connected and separate ways of knowing. Gender differences were found for the harm of hate speech, freedom of speech, empathy, and separate learning as a way of knowing. Women were more negative regarding the harm of hate speech and regarded freedom of speech as less important than men. Additionally, the perceived harm of hate speech was positively associated with empathy, connected knowing, and interdependence, and freedom of speech was positively associated with separate learning and negatively with empathy. Empathy mediated gender differences in the perceived harm of hate speech, and separate learning mediated gender differences in the importance of freedom of speech.