Personality Foundations of Ideological Divide: A Comparison of Women Members of Parliament and Women Voters in Italy

Empirical research is crucial for understanding the personality foundations of political preferences in modern democracies. However, few studies have addressed the personality of top politicians using standard methods to assess basic traits and personal values. In the current research, traits and values of 106 female members of the Italian Parliament were assessed in accordance with the Five‐Factor Model of personality and Schwartz's taxonomy. The same variables were measured in a sample of 864 voters taken from the general population. We investigate the extent to which differences in traits and values contribute to ideological orientation of politicians and voters of rival coalitions. A similar pattern of relations was found in both groups. Yet, traits and values contributed to partisanship of politicians much more than to political preferences of voters. Whereas values fully mediated the contribution of traits to voting, energy/extraversion and agreeableness contributed to political partisanship both directly and indirectly, through values.     

Consequences of Politicians’ Disrespectful Communication Depend on Social Judgment Dimensions and Voters’ Moral Identity

The present study investigates the consequences of respectful versus disrespectful communication in political debates on voters’ social judgments and voting decisions. Reconciling previously mixed results, we argue that the consequences of disrespect vary with the judgment dimension (communion vs. agency) and voters’ moral identity. An initial study (N = 197) finds that a political candidate's disrespect towards his or her opponent affects voting decision through voting intention. A second study (N = 327) shows that disrespect influences voting intention through communion but not through agency ratings. Qualifying the previous finding, a third study (N = 329) shows that both communion and agency judgments act as mediators, but in different ways depending on the level of moral identity. Overall, communion judgments played a more prominent part in explaining the consequences of disrespectful communication. Our findings thus present a nuanced picture of respect and disrespect in political communication and shed light on their ramifications.     

The Purist/Partisan Spectator Discourse: Some Examination and Discrimination

ABSTRACT

The spiralling discourse of sport spectatorship is a compelling development within recent sport philosophy. It is argued that the conceptual foundations of the purist and partisan carry problems. The purist carries the dubious baggage of traditional aesthetics and should be supplanted by the aesthetically neutral cognoscente. The partisan, especially as unpacked by Mumford, is a chimera. Partisanship contains a regard for the excellences of the practice within its own logic. It is argued also that Mumford’s picture of ‘frenetic’ partisanship and ‘tranquil’ purism is over-dichotomised and that partisan response to opposition excellence, and to the plays of one’s own side, is nuanced according to context. The essay also proposes the new concept of the deep partisan, who has a deep and heavily cognitivised love of his club and an intimately connected equivalent love of the excellences of the practice.     

Individual differences in harm-related moral values are associated with functional integration of large-scale brain networks of emotional regulation

Emotions affects moral judgements, and controlled cognitive processes regulate those emotional responses during moral decision making. However, the neurobiological basis of this interaction is unclear. We used a graph theory measurement called participation coefficient (‘PC’) to quantify the resting-state functional connectivity within and between four meta-analytic groupings (MAGs) associated with emotion generation and regulation, to test whether that measurement predicts individual differences in moral foundations-based values. We found that the PC of one of the MAGs (MAG2) was positively correlated with one of the five recognized moral foundations–the one based on harm avoidance. We also found that increased inter-module connectivity between the ventromedial prefrontal cortex, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and middle temporal gyrus with other nodes in the four MAGs was likewise associated with higher endorsement of the Harm foundation. These results suggest that individuals' sensitivity to harm is associated with functional integration of large-scale brain networks of emotional regulation. These findings add to our knowledge of how individual variations in our moral values could be reflected by intrinsic brain network organization and deepen our understanding of the relationship between emotion and cognition during evaluations of moral values.     

Emotional Reactions to COVID-19 Projections and Consequences for Protective Policies and Personal Behavior

How does the public react to information about the likely progression of COVID-19 cases in the United States? How do these reactions vary over the course of the pandemic and by partisanship, and with what consequences for policy attitudes and personal behavior? We argue that reading projections about the peak of COVID-19 cases in the United States is likely to lead to increased levels of anxiety and sadness. We expect that these effects will be more pronounced and less polarized along partisan lines earlier in the pandemic. Finally, we expect that elevated anxiety and sadness should in turn lead to greater support for protective policies to combat the pandemic and a greater inclination to engage in protective behaviors. To test these arguments, we fielded online survey experiments at three points in time (April, June, and August 2020), in which respondents were randomly assigned to a control group or one of two projections about the likely progression of COVID-19 cases in the United States. Across all three waves, we find that exposure to information about case peaks increases anxiety and sadness, though the effects get weaker over time, particularly among Republicans. We also find evidence that these elevated emotional responses increase support for protective policies and behavior.     

Partisan Bias and Information Discounting in Economic Judgments

Research shows that partisanship biases people's views about the economy. Yet, there is little understanding of the factors, if any, that might mitigate the influence of partisanship on these judgments or the effect of partisanship on metacognitive judgments. This study uses an experimental design to show that partisanship continues to bias economic judgments even when subjects receive direct and neutral information about specific aspects of the economy. Moreover, it extends our understanding of partisan bias by showing it has a direct effect on people's metacognitive assessments of their own attitudes—particularly the degree of uncertainty people have in their own economic judgments. However, it appears that people are aware of the conflict between their partisan‐based judgment and economic information since we observe increases in economic uncertainty when information is counter to a subject's partisan predisposition. The results provide new insight into the extent of partisan bias and the difficulty of countering partisan‐based judgments.     

What's the Value of Partisan Loyalty? Partisan Ambivalence,Motivated Reasoning,and Correct Voting in U.S. Presidential Elections

Partisans vary in the extent to which they rely on their partisan identities when voting. Are partisans who rely less on their partisan loyalties more likely to vote correctly than those who stick with their partisan intuitions? Research on motivated reasoning suggests so, but research focused on the heuristic value of partisanship implies otherwise. We examine this question using evidence from the ANES Time Series (1972–2004) and 2008 ANES Panel Survey. We find that ambivalent partisans, that is, those less reliant on partisanship when deciding, are generally less likely to vote correctly than univalent partisans, that is, those more reliant on partisanship. These results challenge some of the pessimism concerning the democratic competence of partisans as they imply that partisans engaging in directional reasoning can nevertheless perform their duties at the ballot box at least as well, if not better, than those engaged in more systematic and “rational” modes of decision-making.     

The Structure of Partisan Attitudes: Reexamining Partisan Dimensionality and Ambivalence

The true nature of Americans' party attachments remains an area of enduring controversy. Due to inadequate measures, scholars have argued without resolution as to whether partisanship is unidimensional and bipolar, or rather attitudes towards each party are on separate dimensions. Using more appropriate, psychologically specific, multi-item measures of positive and negative partisan evaluations, however, (1) goes a long way towards settling this problematic debate; and (2) allows for explorations of the heretofore unexamined role of ambivalence in partisanship. I find that partisan attitudes are unidimensional and strongly bipolar and that ambivalence weakens the impact of partisan attitudes in both attitudes and behaviors in predictable ways.     

How Politicians’ Reelection Efforts Can Reduce Public Trust,Electoral Support,and Policy Approval

Politicians’ desire for reelection motivates them to be responsive to voters’ policy preferences. In the traditional view, voters choose between candidates based on their delivery of favorable outcomes such as ideologically appealing policies or a prospering economy. However, research in psychology shows that, in addition to outcomes, people care about procedural fairness and, particularly, impartial decision‐makers who make decisions without personal motives and interests. This, I argue, confronts politicians with a delicate task: politicians must present voters with favorable policy outcomes but without appearing as if they pursue these policies based on a personal, vote‐maximizing motive for reelection. In four survey experiments, I find support for this argument. Participants were significantly less inclined to trust and vote for politicians and support their policies when political decisions were described as motivated by reelection considerations than when no such motive was present. The findings advance our understanding of how citizens view political representation and have important implications for research on public opinion, legislative behavior, and democratic theory.     

Defensive Partisanship? Evidence that In-Party Scandals Increase Out-Party Hostility

Contemporary U.S. politics is characterized by polarization and interpartisan antipathy. This is accompanied by a media landscape saturated with coverage of political scandals. Applying a social identity perspective, we examined whether exposure to scandals that threaten partisan's moral group image (i.e., in-party scandals), may motivate defensive hostility against opposing partisans. Across three experiments we exposed U.S. partisans to scandals attributed to either in-party or out-party politicians. We then assessed partisan hostility using a variety of operationalizations, including anger at a real outgroup politician (Study 1), judgments about the alleged misdeeds of a fabricated outgroup politician (Study 2), and negative perceptions of opposing party members (Study 3). Strength of partisan identity was assessed as a predicted moderator (Study 3). As expected in- (vs. out-) party scandals, were perceived as group-image threats and elicited greater hostility towards opposing partisans, independent of partisans' ideological extremity or prior affective polarization.     

Understanding Party Identification: A Social Identity Approach

Social identity theory holds that individuals derive their self-concept from knowledge of their membership in a group (or groups) and that they place value and emotional significance on that group membership, with resulting perceptual and attitudinal biases. Individuals favor the in-group to which they belong which they define against a relevant out-group. In this study, a partisan social identity scale was used to reinterpret perceptual features of partisanship through the lens of social identity theory. The social identity of political independents was also examined in an effort to explain the anomalous behavior and identity of partisan leaners. Social identity theory provided a viable alternative framework for understanding the common bipolarity of perceptions regarding the two major U.S. political parties. In addition, an independent social identification may, in part, explain the identity of partisan leaners.     

Charisma Is Contagious: The Effect of Leaders’ Charisma on Observers’ Affect1

Two studies were conducted to test the hypothesis that charismatic leadership, characterized by nonverbal expressiveness and immediacy, would lead via emotional contagion to the imitation of the leader's nonverbal behavior. In Study I, charismatic leaders were college students whose performance of a simulated campaign speech included more smiles, more intense smiles, and longer and more frequent visual attention to the audience. Observers showed higher levels of all 4 relevant behaviors while watching charismatic leaders. In Study 2, college student participants watched more and less charismatic excerpts selected from President Clinton's and ex‐President Bush's responses during their first 1992 televised debate. Comparing the same behaviors, there was a similar pattern to Study I for responses to the Clinton excerpts, and an almost reversed pattern for the Bush excerpts. The overall results support an emotional contagion effect of charismatic leadership when the leader exhibits truly charismatic behavior.     

Offenders’ claims of taking the victims’ perspective can promote forgiveness,or backfire! The moderating role of correctly voicing the victims’ emotions in collective apologies

In the context of collective apologies, we investigate whether offenders’ claim to have taken the victims’ perspective enhances victims’ conciliation. We argue this depends on whether offenders acknowledge emotions in victims that match victims’ emotional experience. In Studies 1 and 2 (Ns = 152 and 171), using scenarios, we experimentally manipulated offenders’ claim and the qualitative or quantitative match of acknowledged emotions. When acknowledged emotions matched victims’ experience, claimed perceptive‐taking increased conciliatory victim responses; but when emotions did not match, the offenders’ claim reduced conciliatory victim responses. In Study 3 (N = 138), African‐Americans were presented with the U.S. government's apology for slavery. We manipulated the perspective‐taking claim and measured the similarity of the emotion profile expressed in the apology to that experienced by African‐Americans over their enslavement. With greater mismatch, the perspective‐taking claim backfired, reducing conciliatory responses. Correct acknowledgment of emotions is key for victims perceiving perspective‐taking and responding conciliatorily.     

How Do U.S. Christians and Atheists Stereotype One Another’s Moral Values?

Moral conflict between Christians and atheists is becoming increasingly heated amidst the U.S. “culture wars,” yet research has been mostly silent regarding how these groups stereotype one another’s moral values and beliefs. We used moral foundations theory to better understand the nature of such stereotypes. In Study 1, U.S. Christian and atheist participants completed measures of moral values from their own perspective as well as the perspectives of typical atheists and typical Christians. Whereas atheists believed their ingroup endorsed fairness/justice values more than Christians, Christians believed their ingroup endorsed all moral values more than atheists. Moreover, both groups held (often extremely) inaccurate stereotypes about the outgroup’s values. In Study 2, participants wrote explicitly about outgroup morality. Atheists typically described Christians more negatively than Christians described atheists, regardless of the moral foundation of concern. Also, Christians’ negative impressions drew primarily from the Authority foundation, and both groups drew heavily from the Care foundation in both their positive and negative depictions. Implications for addressing the growing conflict between Christians and atheists in the United States are discussed.     

Motivated to Forgive? Partisan Scandals and Party Supporters

In this study, we investigate how partisan motivations shape voters' reactions to a political scandal by drawing on a unique survey experiment fielded immediately after Justin Trudeau's brownface/blackface scandal broke during the 2019 Canadian election. We thus explore motivated reasoning in real time in a competitive and highly partisan election context. Are voters more willing to forgive politicians for past behavior when their own party leader's impropriety is cued? To what extent do personal interests, such as cross-pressures or electoral concerns, affect the motivation to forgive? Our findings show that partisan-motivated reasoning is overwhelmingly powerful, producing politically biased judgments of politicians implicated in scandals. Furthermore, voters' willingness to forgive scandals is also influenced by “strategic” considerations, in that preferences over which political party wins or loses in the election affect opinions about whether someone should be forgiven or whether the scandal is considered important at all. However, we find no evidence that personal involvement in the issue raised by the scandal conditions partisan motivations. We posit that the environment—in this case, a competitive election—is an important consideration for understanding the extent and limits of partisan-motivated reasoning.     

Rethinking Compassion: Toward a Political Account of the Partisan Gender Gap in the United States

Scholarship on the political gender gap in the United States has attributed women's political views to their greater compassion, yet individual‐level measures of compassion have almost never been used to directly examine such claims. We address this issue using the only nationally representative survey to include psychometrically validated measures of compassion alongside appropriate political variables. We show that even though women are more compassionate in the aggregate than men in some respects, this added compassion does not explain the gender gap in partisanship. Female respondents report having more tender feelings towards the less fortunate, but these empathetic feelings are not associated with partisan identity. Women also show a slightly greater commitment to a principle of care, but this principle accounts for little of the partisan gap between men and women and has no significant relationship with partisanship after accounting for gender differences in egalitarian political values.     

Predicting moral attitudes and antisocial behavior in young team sport athletes: A self‐determination theory perspective

Identifying the factors associated with prosocial and antisocial behaviors in youth sport may provide evidence to inform interventions aimed at promoting prosocial behaviors and minimizing rule transgressions in young athletes. We investigated relations among social‐contextual factors (e.g., social support), personal motivational factors (e.g., psychological need satisfaction and motivation), young athletes’ attitudes toward prosocial (e.g., keeping winning in proportion) and antisocial (e.g., acceptance of cheating and gamesmanship) behaviors, and their actual rule violations during matches in two samples of athletes. Participants in Sample 1 were young team sport athletes (N = 355) and participants in Sample 2 were young male futsal players (N = 296). Athletes in Sample 1 completed validated self‐report measures of perceived autonomy support, basic need satisfaction, and autonomous and controlled motivation from self‐determination theory, moral attitudes, and past cheating behaviors. Athletes in Sample 2 completed identical measures and two additional behavioral measures: athletes’ self‐reported number of yellow cards received during competition in the last 6 months and the number of yellow cards athletes received from referees in the subsequent 2 months from competition records. We found significant relations between psychological need satisfaction and self‐determined motivation, and athletes’ moral attitudes in both samples. These effects held when statistically controlling for past behavior. Importantly, our prospective analysis of Sample 2 indicated that attitudes toward antisocial behaviors predicted athletes’ rule violations during subsequent tournament matches. Findings indicate that promoting autonomous motivation and need satisfaction through autonomy support may foster attitudes toward prosocial behaviors, and minimize rule transgressions, in young athletes.     

Screw Those Guys: Polarization,Empathy, and Attitudes About Out-Partisans

Empathic ability is the ability to interpret the emotional state of others. In today's highly partisan and polarized environment, empathic ability may play a key role in determining how partisans respond emotionally to changes in public policy and those helped or harmed by the policy. Utilizing Baron-Cohen et al.'s (Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 42, 241–251, 2001) “Reading the Mind in the Eyes” test to measure empathic ability, we conduct a survey experiment where we asked participants to read about a partisan individual who may lose their health insurance if the Affordable Care Act were to be repealed. We show that empathic ability shapes attitudes about people and policies, but that the effects are contingent upon the respondent's partisanship, the target's partisanship, and an interaction of the two. Empathic ability produces more positive affect and policy support among Democrats but reduces positive affect among Republicans. The divergent effects of empathic ability on Democrats and Republicans are further exacerbated when the target is an out-partisan.