The Hostile Media Effect,Biased Assimilation,and Perceptions of a Presidential Debate1

This study examined the relation between 2 seemingly inconsistent phenomena: hostile media effect and biased assimilation. Participants (N = 156) reported their preference for George W. Bush or John Kerry and then viewed a live broadcast of the first Bush–Kerry Presidential debate. Consistent with biased assimilation, candidate preference influenced participants on both sides to perceive their candidate won the debate. Nevertheless, candidate preference modestly induced participants to perceive hostile bias from the debate moderator, Jim Lehrer. The influence of anticipated third‐person effects was also examined. Overall, the results suggest biased assimilation and the hostile media effect are not inconsistent. In some situations, they occur simultaneously. Moreover, the hostile media effect appears to extend beyond news reports to other forms of mediation.     

Using Attitude Strength to Predict Registration and Voting Behavior in the 2004 U.S. Presidential Elections

This study examined attitude strength in the context of the 2004 U.S. presidential election. Surveys of 299 undergraduates assessed attitudes and attitude strength constructs toward Bush/Kerry. The results suggest that (a) attitude strength constructs, especially importance and value-relevance, predict political behavior, (b) indicators of attitude strength may represent two underlying factors, and (c) attitude strength moderates the attitude-candidate choice relationship. Additional results offered some support for the validity of two new attitude strength constructs: higher order attitudes (participants' attitudes about their attitudes) and polarization of candidate attitudes (the absolute value of the difference in attitudes toward Bush and Kerry).     

Interpersonal reactions toward depression and anger

Two studies examined the effect of interpersonal attitude on reactions toward others' expression of anger or depression, Participants read a story in which their schoolmate experienced a negative event and expressed anger or depression, and reported their perceptions, affective reactions, and behavioural intentions such as support or rejection. The results indicated that an expression of anger elicited more negative reactions than an expression of depression only when a person whom participants disliked expressed the emotion. Furthermore, structural equation modelling indicated that the effect of interpersonal attitude on sympathy, blame, and support intention was mediated by the perception of the distressfulness of the event. The discussion considered the processes through which the expression of negative emotions evokes positive or negative interpersonal reactions.     

Willingness to express emotion depends upon perceiving partner care

Two studies document that people are more willing to express emotions that reveal vulnerabilities to partners when they perceive those partners to be more communally responsive to them. In Study 1, participants rated the communal strength they thought various partners felt toward them and their own willingness to express happiness, sadness and anxiety to each partner. Individuals who generally perceive high communal strength from their partners were also generally most willing to express emotion to partners. Independently, participants were more willing to express emotion to particular partners whom they perceived felt more communal strength toward them. In Study 2, members of romantic couples independently reported their own felt communal strength toward one another, perceptions of their partners’ felt communal strength toward them, and willingness to express emotions (happiness, sadness, anxiety, disgust, anger, hurt and guilt) to each other. The communal strength partners reported feeling toward the participants predicted the participants’ willingness to express emotion to those partners. This link was mediated by participants’ perceptions of the partner’s communal strength toward them which, itself, was a joint function of accurate perceptions of the communal strength partners had reported feeling toward them and projections of their own felt communal strength for their partners onto those partners.     

Presidential Debate Viewing and Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9–11: A Study of Affect-as-Transfer and Passionate Reasoning

Extant research on presidential debate viewing focuses primarily on the cognitive outcomes (e.g., knowledge gain) associated with this particular mediated communication event. This study expands effects-based research on political debate viewing by focusing on citizens' discrete emotional reactions to candidates (e.g., joy and anger). In addition, the influence of a 2004 Bush-Kerry presidential debate is analyzed in coordination with the consumption of Michael Moore's controversial film, Fahrenheit 9-11. A 2 (view Fahrenheit 9-11, did not view Fahrenheit 9-11) X 3 (low, medium, or high likelihood of elaboration) independent groups design was used for this study. The study finds evidence of both affect-as-transfer and passionate reasoning. In addition, there is clear support for goal oriented emotional reactions to candidates strongly predicting overall confidence in candidates' policy positions.     

Attitudes toward emotions

The present work outlines a theory of attitudes toward emotions, provides a measure of attitudes toward emotions, and then tests several predictions concerning relationships between attitudes toward specific emotions and emotional situation selection, emotional traits, emotional reactivity, and emotion regulation. The present conceptualization of individual differences in attitudes toward emotions focuses on specific emotions and presents data indicating that 5 emotions (anger, sadness, joy, fear, and disgust) load on 5 separate attitude factors (Study 1). Attitudes toward emotions predicted emotional situation selection (Study 2). Moreover, attitudes toward approach emotions (e.g., anger, joy) correlated directly with the associated trait emotions, whereas attitudes toward withdrawal emotions (fear, disgust) correlated inversely with associated trait emotions (Study 3). Similar results occurred when attitudes toward emotions were used to predict state emotional reactivity (Study 4). Finally, attitudes toward emotions predicted specific forms of emotion regulation (Study 5).     

Deliver us from evil: the effects of mortality salience and reminders of 9/11 on support for President George W. Bush

According to terror management theory, heightened concerns about mortality should intensify the appeal of charismatic leaders. To assess this idea, we investigated how thoughts about death and the 9/11 terrorist attacks influence Americans' attitudes toward current U.S. President George W. Bush. Study 1 found that reminding people of their own mortality (mortality salience) increased support for Bush and his counterterrorism policies. Study 2 demonstrated that subliminal exposure to 9/11-related stimuli brought death-related thoughts closer to consciousness. Study 3 showed that reminders of both mortality and 9/11 increased support for Bush. In Study 4, mortality salience led participants to become more favorable toward Bush and voting for him in the upcoming election but less favorable toward Presidential candidate John Kerry and voting for him. Discussion focused on the role of terror management processes in allegiance to charismatic leaders and political decision making.     

What to Say to an Online Support‐Seeker? The Influence of Others' Responses and Support‐Seekers' Replies

Research on online support forums has largely overlooked the quality of support provision. The present experiment examined how others' responses and a support-seeker's reply can influence action‐focused supportiveness, emotion‐focused supportiveness, and politeness of readers' support messages. Results showed that the supportiveness of others' comments was associated with subsequent readers' perceptions of public opinion toward the support‐seeker and readers' liking of the support‐seeker, which in turn influenced the quality of readers' support messages.     

Does Corporate Sponsorship of a Socially‐Oriented Message Make a Difference? An Investigation of the Effects of Sponsorship Identity on Responses to an Anti‐Drinking and Driving Message

The sponsorship of social messages is becoming increasingly popular among corporations. Despite the growing involvement of corporations in the marketing of causes, little research has been done to guide these initiatives. Before corporations become more actively involved in the sponsorship of social messages, it is important to understand whether sponsor identity impacts the effectiveness of these messages. This article presents a preliminary investigation into the differences created by corporate versus nonprofit sponsorship of a social message. Results from two experiments suggest that consumers process socially‐oriented messages differently based on the identity of the sponsor. Participants who viewed an anti‐drinking and driving message sponsored by the nonprofit organization, MADD, tended to infer more positive, society‐serving motives of the sponsor, whereas those who viewed the same ad sponsored by Budweiser, a corporation, inferred more negative, self‐serving (ulterior) motives of the sponsor. However, neither message affected the participant's attitude toward the sponsor of the message.     

Motivated by guilt and low felt trust: The impact of negotiators' anger expressions on the implementation of negotiated agreements

Prior research has identified benefits from certain emotion tactics in negotiation, particularly expressing anger to achieve short‐term gains. We demonstrate that such tactics can be strategically problematic due to their impact on an actor's emotions and felt trust. Through five studies, we find that negotiators' use of anger tactics during a negotiation increased their feelings of guilt and reduced the extent to which they felt trusted by their counterpart following the negotiation. We found this guilt to be the result of their aggressive tone and how they treated their counterpart. The guilt and diminished felt trust in turn motivated negotiators to engage in greater cooperative behaviors during the deal implementation process that benefited their counterpart, even if doing so was costly to the negotiator. Our results demonstrate that negotiator guilt and felt trust resulting from anger tactics influence the dynamic relationship between negotiators and their counterparts. This in turn has strategic implications for negotiators, who attempt to mitigate these negative feelings during the crucial implementation phase of a negotiated agreement.     

Indirect effects of supportive communication during conversations about coping with relational transgressions

Researchers investigating relational transgressions have minimally explored the role of third‐party personal network members in the coping process. It is argued that supportive messages during conversations about coping with relational transgressions are associated with transgressed individuals' perceived stress and feelings about the transgression. Results from a study involving conversations between 50 pairs of personal network members suggest that participants' perceptions of stress and negative emotions decreased from pre‐ to postinteraction. By testing an indirect effects model, it was found that emotion support had a negative indirect association with participants' perceptions of stress, anger, and dejection related to the transgression because of quality of support. The theoretical implications of the findings are discussed, and directions for extending research on communicative coping are provided.     

Procedural Perceptions and Support for the U.S. Supreme Court

This paper examines public support toward the U.S. Supreme Court. Although previous scholars have rightly focused on policy outcomes in explaining public attitudes toward the Court, outcome‐based theories are unable to explain why support for the Court remains high despite public disagreement with Court decisions. Some scholars argue the low visibility of the Court shields it from public scrutiny. The exposure explanation, however, is inconsistent with the empirical finding that to know the Court is to love it. This paper reconciles these differences by showing how media coverage of the Court can influence procedural perceptions and subsequent support for the Court. Expanding on recent studies examining media coverage of the Court and perceptions of fairness, this study examines how procedural perceptions mediate support for the Court. An experimental design shows that the media's portrayal of procedural information as either fair or unfair influences public evaluations of procedural fairness and subsequently support for the Court as an institution and the individual justices serving on the Court's bench.     

Judgements of others’ emotional appropriateness are multidimensional

This study investigated the multidimensional structure of judgements of emotional appropriateness, the degree to which an observer judges a target's emotion to conform to observer-valued expectations for emotion in that context. Participants (N=169) were shown one of two brief video clips of an actor either showing anger or neutral expressions in an anger-evoking situation of either low, medium, or high severity. Participants rated the target's emotion on the Perception of Emotion Appropriateness Rating Scale (PEARS), which taps observers’ perceptions of a target's emotional appropriateness for a specific situation. We found that appropriateness ratings are comprised of three factors, assessment of Type Present (type of emotion in expression); Type Absent (missing key emotions); and Intensity (intensity with which the emotion is felt or expressed). Results are discussed in terms of the usefulness of a multidimensional conceptualisation of emotional appropriateness.     

“Seeing is believing”: The effects of facial expressions of emotion and verbal communication in social dilemmas

In social dilemmas, verbal communication of one's intentions is an important factor in increasing cooperation. In addition to verbal communication of one's intentions, also the communication of emotions of anger and happiness can influence cooperative behavior. In the present paper, we argue that facial expressions of emotion moderate verbal communication in social dilemmas. More specifically, three experiments showed that if the other person displayed happiness he or she was perceived as honest, trustworthy, and reliable, and cooperation was increased when verbal communication was cooperative rather than self‐interested. However, if the other person displayed anger, verbal communication did not influence people's decision behavior. Results also showed interactive effects on people's perceptions of trustworthiness, which partially mediated decision behavior. These findings suggest that emotion displays have an important function in organizational settings because they are able to influence social interactions and cooperative behavior. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Promoting a Brand's Emotion Benefits: The Influence of Emotion Categorization Processes on Consumer Evaluations

Research in psychology has demonstrated that people have a shared knowledge of emotion categories. Building on this research and our understanding of categorization processes, this article proposes a mechanism by which consumers utilize information about a brand's “emotion benefits” in forming attitudes. The results of 2 experimental studies show that (a) consumers’ processing of a brand's emotion benefit information is consistent with categorization processes such that emotion category congruity effects are large in basic—versus subordinate—level conditions, (b) associating a brand with certain emotions can influence brand and ad attitudes without necessarily eliciting emotions during exposure to advertising, (c) emotion category congruity “works” through attitude‐toward‐the‐ad and emotion benefit beliefs in influencing brand attitudes, and (d) subjective product category knowledge moderates the strength of these effects. Taken together, these results explicate the process by which a knowledge‐based consideration of a brand's emotional benefits can influence consumers’ beliefs about the brand and brand attitudes.     

Social justifications for moral emotions: when reasons for disgust are less elaborated than for anger

In the present research, we tested the unreasoning disgust hypothesis: moral disgust, in particular in response to a violation of a bodily norm, is less likely than moral anger to be justified with cognitively elaborated reasons. In Experiment 1, participants were asked to explain why they felt anger and disgust toward pedophiles. Participants were more likely to invoke elaborated reasons, versus merely evaluative responses, when explaining their anger, versus disgust. Experiment 2 used a between-participants design; participants explained why they felt either anger or disgust toward seven groups that either violated a sexual or nonsexual norm. Again, elaborated reasons were less prevalent when explaining their disgust versus anger and, in particular, when explaining disgust toward a group that violated a sexual norm. Experiment 3 further established that these findings are due to a lower accessibility of elaborated reasons for bodily disgust, rather than inhibition in using them when provided. From these findings, it can be concluded that communicating external reasons for moral disgust at bodily violations is made more difficult due to the unavailability of those reasons to people.     

Fret not thyself: The persuasive effect of anger expression and the role of perceived appropriateness

Anger expression is increasingly prevalent in Western mass media, particularly in messages that aim to persuade the audience of a certain point of view. There is a dearth of research, however, investigating whether expressing anger in mediated messages is indeed effective as a persuasive strategy. In the present research, the results of four experiments showed that expressing anger in a persuasive message was perceived as less socially appropriate than expressing non-emotional disagreement. There was also evidence that perceived appropriateness mediated a negative persuasive effect of anger expression (Study 2–4) and that anger expression resulted in perceptions of the persuasive source as unfriendly and incompetent (Studies 1 and 2). In all, the findings suggest that politicians and other public figures should be cautious in using anger as a persuasive instrument.     

Are you talking to me?! Separating the people from the problem when expressing emotions in negotiation

Emotions such as anger and happiness have pervasive interpersonal effects in negotiations. We propose that the nature of the effects depends on the target of the emotion, that is, whether the emotion is directed toward a person or a specific behavior. In a computer-mediated negotiation (N = 87), participants received either angry or happy messages from a simulated opponent, which were either behavior-oriented or person-directed. Behavior-oriented anger elicited larger concessions than behavior-oriented happiness, whereas person-directed anger elicited smaller concessions than person-directed happiness. This reversal could be attributed to the strategic value of the emotional expression, which was higher in the behavior-oriented condition than in the person-directed condition. These findings show that the interpersonal effects of anger and happiness depend critically on the target of the emotion.     

The Role of Anger in the Biased Assimilation of Political Information

Political psychologists have established that politically motivated reasoning is a common phenomenon; however, the field knows comparatively less about the psychological mechanisms that drive it. Drawing on advances in the understanding of the relevance of emotion to political reasoning and behavior, we argue that anger likely plays a major role in motivating individuals to engage in the biased assimilation of political information—an evaluative bias in favor of information that bolsters one's views and against information that undercuts them. We test this proposition with two online studies, the second of which includes a quasi‐representative sample of Americans. The studies support our expectations. Individuals felt more negative emotions toward arguments that undermined their attitudes and positive emotions toward arguments that confirmed them; however, anger was nearly alone in fueling biased reactions to issue arguments.     

Making Americans Feel Great Again? Personal Significance Predicts Political Intentions of Losers and Winners of the 2016 U.S. Election

Reactions of losers and winners of political elections have important consequences for the political system during times of power transition. In four studies conducted immediately before and after the 2016 U.S. presidential elections, we investigated how personal significance induced by success or failure of one's candidate is related to hostile versus benevolent intentions toward political adversaries. We found that the less significant supporters of Hillary Clinton and supporters of Donald Trump felt after an imagined (Study 1A) or actual (Study 2) electoral failure the more they were willing to engage in peaceful actions against the elected president and the less they were willing to accept the results of the elections. However, while significance gain due to an imagined or actual electoral success was related to more benevolent intentions among Clinton supporters (Study 1B), it was related to more hostile intentions among Trump supporters (Studies 1B, 2, and 3).