In the recent political election, both candidates used ads that suggested the election of the other candidate would lead to disastrous situations. Ads such as this and this attempt to portray the danger in certain candidates. These ads focus on threats of terrorism and the inability of specific candidates to protect against it. Though the direct argument these ads make is apparent, recent psychological studies reveal how the subject of these ads, specifically the emphasis on danger and death, can affect an individual’s political leaning.
Thus study focused on terror management theory and interpersonal attachment. Terror management theory describes how people react when confronted with a threat or made aware of their mortality. (Jamie Arndt et al, 448) Interpersonal attachment, IA, explicates how people connect with and depend on others. People with a low IA have a low dependence on others, whereas those with hich IA depend and socialize more with others. The degree of this attachment varies depending on upbringing. (Jamie Arndt et al, 449) This study combined terror management theory, TMT, and IA to predict and test how IA would affect the political leanings of those made salient of their mortality. The researchers base their predictions on the principle that low IA is associated with conservative family values, “strict-father model, characterized by the view that life is difficult and dangerous, and by moral absolutes of tradition, hierarchy, opposing ‘evil’” (Jamie Arndt et al, 449), and high IA is connected with liberal family values, “the nurturantparent model, characterized by moral imperatives of empathy, nurturance, and growth.” (Jamie Arndt et al, 449). The researchers also note that social ideas are often designed to protect against mortality salience and that people confronted with their mortality tend towards the most easily adopted social structure. (Jamie Arndt et al, 448) The researchers use these ideas to predict that individuals with high IA will lean towards liberal political views when presented with mortality salience, and individuals with low IA will tend towards conservative views when presented with mortality salience. (Jamie Arndt et al, 449-450)
The researchers tested volunteers in advance to determine their level of interpersonal attachment. ((Jamie Arndt et al, 450) They then gave the volunteers one of two questionnaires to read. One contained questions that presented mortality salience, while the other essay replaced references to death with “dental pain”. (Jamie Arndt et al, 450) The volunteers then answered questionnaires detailing their support for either George W. Bush or John Kerry and their political stance from very conservative to very liberal. (Jamie Arndt et al, 450)
The results showed that individuals with low IA had a much higher rating for Bush when presented with mortality salience than those who did not. Likewise those with high IA had a much higher rating for Kerry when presented with mortality salience. The reverse for each candidate was true, high IA individuals rated bush lower when presented with mortality salience and low IA individuals rated Kerry lower when presented with mortality salience. As predicted, those with high IA rated themselves more liberal when presented with mortality salience, and those with low IA rated them selves more conservative when presented with it. (Jamie Arndt et al, 451-452) This means that more intorverted people tend to lean to more conservative political views when presented with ads that focus on danger and mortality, whereas more extroverted people will tend to adopt more liberal political views in the same situation.
This study demonstrates how we can be affected by fear-mongering. Ads that focus on danger and death may have a greater affect on our political leanings than we realize. Our desire to protect ourselves from the knowledge of our mortality can be greater than our desire to determine the truth. This research illuminates areas of our psyche that we must closely examine if we are to remain objective in political discussions.
(The article in pdf. You may need to log in to your UNF account to view it. Graphs of results are on page 4-5.)
Works Cited
Jamie Arndt, Cathy R. Cox, Jeff Greenberg, Spee Kosloff, Tom Pyszczynski, Sheldon Solomon, and David R. Weise. “Interpersonal Politics: The Role of Terror Management and Attachment Processes
in Shaping Political Preferences”. Psychological Science. Ed. Robert Kail. 2007. 448-459.
Free Speech and Academic Engagement
13 years ago
3 comments:
So, and correct me if I am wrong, but what I understand from this is that when presented with mortality salience, our natural inclinations will be heightened. In other words, regardless of our political stance, our natural inclination to be conservative (often amongst introverts) or liberal (often amongst extroverts) is simply exposed greater than before. So, if this is true, exposing people to this mortality would improve the chances that people will vote for whom they naturally agree with, rather than be swayed by other forms of persuasion. It seems then the target audience for the liberal campaign to show these mortality claims to would be the on the fence liberals, and the opposite true for the conservative campaign. This is an interesting statistic and study that would be something to watch for in my own voting tendencies, as well as in strategies of the two parties.
It may be that the tendencies are as you have stated, but it does not have to be. It is possible that introverted people may choose a liberal political stance while not exposed to mortality salience and vice versa. I seem to recall the original paper specifying that the subjects had varied political views, and that the change was consistent regardless of original position. It may be though that there is a correlation between intrapersonal association and initial political leaning. That would be an interesting blog post.
I thought this was very interesting as well.O f course, if you watched tv during that election you saw politcal ads that referred to terrorism and the war against it, a major issue for that race. I guess I would describe myself as extroverted and lean towards the more liberal political views, but I wouldn't have thought these opinions were a reflection of a natural disposition that comes out when faced with morality. It makes me wonder though, with all of the negative campaigning Buch did in Florida this year, and with what could be called an Obama landslide, if that means the majority of voters were extroverts?
Post a Comment