TY - JOUR
T1 - Emotion and Political Judgment
T2 - Expectancy Violation and Affective Intelligence
AU - Johnston, Christopher D.
AU - Lavine, Howard
AU - Woodson, Benjamin
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2015, © 2015 University of Utah.
PY - 2015/9/13
Y1 - 2015/9/13
N2 - What factors prompt citizens to switch from a partisan judgment strategy, one in which they reflexively side with the in-group in policy and electoral contests, to a more thoughtful one, in which they pause to consider additional information? Previous work suggests that variation in political reasoning is triggered by the experience of anxiety. In this research, we examine a broader consideration: whether the overall pattern of experienced emotions confirms or violates one’s partisan expectations. Using both cross-sectional and panel data from the American National Election Studies, we examine how the emotions of anxiety, anger, and enthusiasm influence the manner in which voters appraise presidential candidates and update their opinions on salient policy issues. In line with an expectancy violation framework, the results consistently indicate that expectancy-violating emotions (e.g., experiencing enthusiasm toward the other party’s candidate) heighten deliberative reasoning and suppress partisan cue-taking, and that expectancy-confirming emotions (e.g., experiencing anxiety toward the other party’s candidate) have the reverse set of effects. We discuss the implications of our findings for American politics and for theories of political information processing and judgment.
AB - What factors prompt citizens to switch from a partisan judgment strategy, one in which they reflexively side with the in-group in policy and electoral contests, to a more thoughtful one, in which they pause to consider additional information? Previous work suggests that variation in political reasoning is triggered by the experience of anxiety. In this research, we examine a broader consideration: whether the overall pattern of experienced emotions confirms or violates one’s partisan expectations. Using both cross-sectional and panel data from the American National Election Studies, we examine how the emotions of anxiety, anger, and enthusiasm influence the manner in which voters appraise presidential candidates and update their opinions on salient policy issues. In line with an expectancy violation framework, the results consistently indicate that expectancy-violating emotions (e.g., experiencing enthusiasm toward the other party’s candidate) heighten deliberative reasoning and suppress partisan cue-taking, and that expectancy-confirming emotions (e.g., experiencing anxiety toward the other party’s candidate) have the reverse set of effects. We discuss the implications of our findings for American politics and for theories of political information processing and judgment.
KW - U.S. politics
KW - electoral choice
KW - partisanship
KW - political judgment
KW - political psychology
KW - public opinion
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84938939468&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84938939468&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/1065912915593644
DO - 10.1177/1065912915593644
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84938939468
SN - 1065-9129
VL - 68
SP - 474
EP - 492
JO - Political Research Quarterly
JF - Political Research Quarterly
IS - 3
ER -