Anxiety, Enthusiasm, and the Vote: The Emotional Underpinnings of Learning and Involvement During Presidential Campaigns | American Political Science Review | Cambridge Core (original) (raw)

Abstract

By incorporating emotionality, we propose to enrich information-processing models of citizens' behavior during election campaigns. We demonstrate that two distinct dynamic emotional responses play influential roles during election campaigns: anxiety and enthusiasm. Anxiety, responding to threat and novelty, stimulates attention toward the campaign and political learning and discourages reliance on habitual cues for voting. Enthusiasm powerfully influences candidate preferences and stimulates interest and involvement in the campaign. The findings support a theoretical perspective that regards cognitive and emotional processes as mutually engaged and mutually supportive rather than as antagonistic. We suggest that the democratic process may not be undermined by emotionality as is generally presupposed. Instead, we believe that people use emotions as tools for efficient information processing and thus enhance their abilities to engage in meaningful political deliberation.

References

Abelson, Robert P., Kinder, Donald R., Peters, Mark D., and Fiske, Susan T.. 1982. “Affective and Semantic Components in Political Personal Perception.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 42:619–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ax, Albert. 1953. “The Physiological Differentiation between Fear and Anger in Humans.” Psychosomatic Medicine 15:433–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Brady, Henry, and Sniderman, Paul. 1985. “Attitude Attribution: A Group Basis for Political Reasoning.” American Political Science Review 79:1061–78.Google Scholar

Brent, E., and Granberg, D.. 1982. “Subjective Agreement with the Presidential Candidates of 1976 and 1980.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 42:393–403.Google Scholar

Bruce, John M. 1991. “Emotion and Evaluation in Nomination Politics.” Presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington.Google Scholar

Cacioppo, John T., Petty, Richard E., Losch, Mary E. and Kim, Hai-sook. 1986. “Electromyographic Activity over Facial Muscle Regions Can Differentiate the Valence and Intensity of Affective Reactions.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 50:260–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Converse, Philip E. 1962. “Information Flow and the Stability of Partisan Attitudes.” Public Opinion Quarterly 26:578–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Derryberry, Douglas. 1991. “The Immediate Effects of Positive and Negative Feedback Signals.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 61:267–78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Diener, Ed, and Emmons, Robert A.. 1985. “The Independence of Positive and Negative Affect.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 47:1105–17.Google Scholar

Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar

Eccles, John C. 1989. Evolution of the Brain: Creation of the Self. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Edelman, Murray. 1964. The Symbolic Uses of Politics. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar

Enelow, James M., and Hinich, Melvin J.. 1984. The Spatial Theory of Voting: An Introduction. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Fonberg, Elzbieta. 1986. “Amygdala, Emotions, Motivation, and Depressive States.” In Emotion: Theory, Research, and Experience, ed. Plutchik, R. and Kellerman, H.. London: Academic.Google Scholar

Fowles, Don C. 1980. “The Three Arousal Model: Implications of Gray's Two-Factor Learning Theory for Heart Rate, Electrodermal Activity, and Psychopathy.” Psychophysiology 17:87–104.” American Political Science Review 73:369–85..” American Journal of Political Science 32:345–68.Google Scholar

Taylor, Shelley E. 1991. “Asymmetrical Effects of Positive and Negative Events: The Mobilization-Minimization Hypothesis.” Psychological Bulletin 110:67–85.Google Scholar

Tellegen, Auke. 1985. “Structures of Mood and Personality and Their Relevance to Assessing Anxiety, with an Emphasis on Self-Report.” In Anxiety and the Anxiety Disorders, ed. Tuma, A. H. and Maser, J. D.. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

Tichenor, P. J., Donohue, G. A., and Olien, C. N.. 1970. “Mass Media Flow and Differential Growth in Knowledge.” Public Opinion Quarterly 34:159–70.Google Scholar

Verba, Sidney, and Nie, Norman H.. 1972. Participation in American: Political Democracy and Social Equality. New York-Harper & Row.Google Scholar

Watson, David, Clark, Lee Anna, and Tellegen, Auke. 1988. “Development and Validation of Brief Measures of Positive and Negative Affect: The PANAS Scales.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54:1063–70.Google Scholar

Watson, David, and Tellegen, Auke. 1985. “Toward a Consensual Structure of Mood.” Psychological Bulletin 98:219–35.Google Scholar

Zajonc, Robert B. 1980. “Feeling and Thinking: Preferences Need No Inferences.” American Psychologist 39:151–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Zajonc, Robert B. 1982. “On the Primacy of Affect.” American Psychologist 39:117–23.Google Scholar

Zevon, Michael, and Tellegen, Auke. 1982. “The Structure of Mood Change: An Ideographic/Nomothetic Analysis.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 43:111–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar