Liberals are more emotion-driven than conservatives

[lostinblue 1,989]

Liberals are more emotion-driven than conservatives

Date:

November 7, 2014

Source:

Society for Personality and Social Psychology

Summary:

Researchers have studied the interaction between emotion and political ideology, showing that the motivating power of emotions is not the same for those on different ends of the ideological spectrum.

Emotions are powerful motivators of human behavior and attitudes. Emotions also play an important role in guiding policy support in conflict and other political contexts. Researchers at Tel Aviv University and the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya have studied the interaction between emotion and political ideology, showing that the motivating power of emotions is not the same for those on different ends of the ideological spectrum. Their research is published in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.

Related Articles

• Political science
• Authoritarianism
• Classical liberalism
• Political system
• Emotion
• Government

Design of the study

The researchers conducted six studies to examine emotions, ideology, and how they act together to affect support for policies. The first two studies focused on intergroup empathy, while the third study examined the interactive influence of ideology and despair on support for policies. Participants self-identified as being at different points of the right-left ideological spectrum.

Specific scenarios were selected for the six studies relating to current events in Israel, mainly surrounding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and possible steps towards its resolution. Lead researcher Ruthie Pliskin elaborates on why the specific scenarios were chosen; "We selected our different scenarios with the aim of tackling both positive and negative developments in intergroup conflicts, eliciting a range of different emotions towards the out-group and the situation, referring to different types of out-groups, and among different in-groups. Furthermore, we wanted to utilize both contrived, controlled scenarios, and major real-world developments, reflecting real and possible political developments."

Studies 4 through 6 were designed to alleviate some of the limitations in the first three studies. Study 4 utilized a correlational design addressing real-life developments--renewed peace negotiations--and a representative sample of Jewish Israelis. Study 4 allowed the researchers to examine whether the effect in the first three studies could be replicated in a real-world scenario, and also generalized to anger--a negative intergroup emotion brought on by the perception of another group's actions as unjust, and associated with a desire to confront or attack the anger-evoking group.

Study 5 followed a similar design as Study 4 and was conducted during wartime. The study controlled for various measures of attitude strength and group identification, ruling out the possibility that the previous findings simply reflect right-left differences in attitude strength rather than in the rigidity with which they hold a specific attitude. Study 6 went a step further and examined a novel population--Palestinian citizens of Israel--to eliminate the possibility that the findings are population-dependent, and expanded the examination to include fear--an emotion often related to rightist ideology.

Results of the study

In line with previous scientific knowledge on the relative rigidity of rightist ideological beliefs, the first three studies illustrate that induced emotions have a greater influence on leftists' positions than on rightists' positions, even though the experimental manipulations affected levels of emotion similarly for all participants. Even the third study, in which a negative emotion was induced, led to changes in policy support only among leftists, as was the case with empathy in the first two studies. Induced empathy toward both Palestinians (study 1) and asylum-seekers (study 2) led to increased support for conciliatory and humanitarian policies among leftists, whereas induced despair (study 3) decreased support for conciliatory policies only among leftists.

Studies 4 through 6 looked at real-world scenarios, and found that Jewish-Israeli leftists' policy support was more related to both empathy and anger than rightists', at times of both peace efforts (study 4) and war (study 5). The final study found the same pattern of results with regard to fear among a different population, demonstrating that the interactive effect of ideology and emotion on policy support is not limited to a given population nor to emotions typically associated with leftist ideology.

Ms. Pliskin and her colleagues believe that these results may apply to other cultures, including liberals and conservatives in the U.S. "We would expect to find similar results among rightists and leftists in other cultures, including conservatives and liberals in the U.S., because of the cross-cultural similarities in the superstructure of ideology and the needs associated with rightist versus leftist ideology--and because of how these factors relate to emotional processes and their outcomes." But Ms. Pliskin does caution that more research would need to be done to determine if there are cultural factors that may limit or increase observed left-right differences.

Future research directions

The current research reveals that similar emotions can produce very different emotional outcomes for people of different ideologies. The findings help to illuminate how ideology and emotions work together to shape positions, and why we find that political events often push leftists more to the right, but rarely push rightists more to the left. The researchers were unable to determine in the current research under what circumstances emotions may in fact motivate changes in rightists' positions, to the same extent as leftists'. More research is necessary to address that question.

Ms. Pliskin and her colleagues are already broadening their research to comparing Israeli and Dutch societies. Their research is also comparing the outcomes of fear in light of events either related or unrelated to the dominant ideological divides in society.

Story Source:

The above story is based on materials provided by Society for Personality and Social Psychology. Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.

Journal Reference:

1. Ruthie Pliskin, Daniel Bar-Tal, Gal Sheppes , Eran Halperin. Are leftists more emotion-driven than rightists? The interactive influence of ideology and emotions on support for policies. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2014

Cite This Page:

• MLA
• APA
• Chicago

Society for Personality and Social Psychology. "Liberals are more emotion-driven than conservatives." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 7 November 2014. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/11/141107091559.htm>.

In line with previous scientific knowledge on the relative rigidity of rightist ideological beliefs, the first three studies illustrate that induced emotions have a greater influence on leftists' positions than on rightists' positions, even though the experimental manipulations affected levels of emotion similarly for all participants. Even the third study, in which a negative emotion was induced, led to changes in policy support only among leftists, as was the case with empathy in the first two studies. Induced empathy toward both Palestinians (study 1) and asylum-seekers (study 2) led to increased support for conciliatory and humanitarian policies among leftists, whereas induced despair (study 3) decreased support for conciliatory policies only among leftists.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

There is nobody more emotional than the right wing outrage brigade. Anger is an emotion. As is fear. We know that right wing nutters are full of both.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

Liberals are more emotion-driven than conservatives

Date:

November 7, 2014

Source:

Society for Personality and Social Psychology

Summary:

Researchers have studied the interaction between emotion and political ideology, showing that the motivating power of emotions is not the same for those on different ends of the ideological spectrum.

Emotions are powerful motivators of human behavior and attitudes. Emotions also play an important role in guiding policy support in conflict and other political contexts. Researchers at Tel Aviv University and the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya have studied the interaction between emotion and political ideology, showing that the motivating power of emotions is not the same for those on different ends of the ideological spectrum. Their research is published in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.

Related Articles

• Political science
• Authoritarianism
• Classical liberalism
• Political system
• Emotion
• Government

Design of the study

The researchers conducted six studies to examine emotions, ideology, and how they act together to affect support for policies. The first two studies focused on intergroup empathy, while the third study examined the interactive influence of ideology and despair on support for policies. Participants self-identified as being at different points of the right-left ideological spectrum.

Specific scenarios were selected for the six studies relating to current events in Israel, mainly surrounding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and possible steps towards its resolution. Lead researcher Ruthie Pliskin elaborates on why the specific scenarios were chosen; "We selected our different scenarios with the aim of tackling both positive and negative developments in intergroup conflicts, eliciting a range of different emotions towards the out-group and the situation, referring to different types of out-groups, and among different in-groups. Furthermore, we wanted to utilize both contrived, controlled scenarios, and major real-world developments, reflecting real and possible political developments."

Studies 4 through 6 were designed to alleviate some of the limitations in the first three studies. Study 4 utilized a correlational design addressing real-life developments--renewed peace negotiations--and a representative sample of Jewish Israelis. Study 4 allowed the researchers to examine whether the effect in the first three studies could be replicated in a real-world scenario, and also generalized to anger--a negative intergroup emotion brought on by the perception of another group's actions as unjust, and associated with a desire to confront or attack the anger-evoking group.

Study 5 followed a similar design as Study 4 and was conducted during wartime. The study controlled for various measures of attitude strength and group identification, ruling out the possibility that the previous findings simply reflect right-left differences in attitude strength rather than in the rigidity with which they hold a specific attitude. Study 6 went a step further and examined a novel population--Palestinian citizens of Israel--to eliminate the possibility that the findings are population-dependent, and expanded the examination to include fear--an emotion often related to rightist ideology.

Results of the study

In line with previous scientific knowledge on the relative rigidity of rightist ideological beliefs, the first three studies illustrate that induced emotions have a greater influence on leftists' positions than on rightists' positions, even though the experimental manipulations affected levels of emotion similarly for all participants. Even the third study, in which a negative emotion was induced, led to changes in policy support only among leftists, as was the case with empathy in the first two studies. Induced empathy toward both Palestinians (study 1) and asylum-seekers (study 2) led to increased support for conciliatory and humanitarian policies among leftists, whereas induced despair (study 3) decreased support for conciliatory policies only among leftists.

Studies 4 through 6 looked at real-world scenarios, and found that Jewish-Israeli leftists' policy support was more related to both empathy and anger than rightists', at times of both peace efforts (study 4) and war (study 5). The final study found the same pattern of results with regard to fear among a different population, demonstrating that the interactive effect of ideology and emotion on policy support is not limited to a given population nor to emotions typically associated with leftist ideology.

Ms. Pliskin and her colleagues believe that these results may apply to other cultures, including liberals and conservatives in the U.S. "We would expect to find similar results among rightists and leftists in other cultures, including conservatives and liberals in the U.S., because of the cross-cultural similarities in the superstructure of ideology and the needs associated with rightist versus leftist ideology--and because of how these factors relate to emotional processes and their outcomes." But Ms. Pliskin does caution that more research would need to be done to determine if there are cultural factors that may limit or increase observed left-right differences.

Future research directions

The current research reveals that similar emotions can produce very different emotional outcomes for people of different ideologies. The findings help to illuminate how ideology and emotions work together to shape positions, and why we find that political events often push leftists more to the right, but rarely push rightists more to the left. The researchers were unable to determine in the current research under what circumstances emotions may in fact motivate changes in rightists' positions, to the same extent as leftists'. More research is necessary to address that question.

Ms. Pliskin and her colleagues are already broadening their research to comparing Israeli and Dutch societies. Their research is also comparing the outcomes of fear in light of events either related or unrelated to the dominant ideological divides in society.

Story Source:

The above story is based on materials provided by Society for Personality and Social Psychology. Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.

Journal Reference:

• Ruthie Pliskin, Daniel Bar-Tal, Gal Sheppes , Eran Halperin. Are leftists more emotion-driven than rightists? The interactive influence of ideology and emotions on support for policies. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2014

Cite This Page:

• MLA
• APA
• Chicago

Society for Personality and Social Psychology. "Liberals are more emotion-driven than conservatives." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 7 November 2014. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/11/141107091559.htm>.

In line with previous scientific knowledge on the relative rigidity of rightist ideological beliefs, the first three studies illustrate that induced emotions have a greater influence on leftists' positions than on rightists' positions, even though the experimental manipulations affected levels of emotion similarly for all participants. Even the third study, in which a negative emotion was induced, led to changes in policy support only among leftists, as was the case with empathy in the first two studies. Induced empathy toward both Palestinians (study 1) and asylum-seekers (study 2) led to increased support for conciliatory and humanitarian policies among leftists, whereas induced despair (study 3) decreased support for conciliatory policies only among leftists.

And in other news water is wet. Liberals deal in hysteria as opposed to facts lol who knew

[JohnR! 5,495]

True. Liberals put their heart where their issues are whereas the other side lives off of pure histrionics and unfettered Brobdingnagian displays of knee-jerk unfounded outrage.

There is nobody more emotional than the right wing outrage brigade. Anger is an emotion. As is fear. We know that right wing nutters are full of both.

[Teddy B 17,251]

Liberals are more emotion-driven than conservatives

I strongly disagree.

[JohnR! 5,495]

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Here is the face of indifference...

I strongly disagree.

[spookyturtle 9,465]

And in other news water is wet. Liberals deal in hysteria as opposed to facts lol who knew

You're about as moderate as Marvin is white.

[Teddy B 17,251]

You're about as moderate as Marvin is white.

He's been thrown out of the Middle Of The Road Club for being an imposter.

[lostinblue 1,989]

Why Obama Won: The Empathy Factor

What is the common denominator, the central thread running through these policy choices? It's not just compassion, defined as a sympathetic awareness of others' distress together with a desire to alleviate it; it's empathy -- the action of understanding, being aware of, being sensitive to, and vicariously experiencing the feelings, thoughts and experience of another.

In other words, empathy is not merely feeling sorry for those who are less fortunate and wanting to help them, but it's being able to put oneself in another's shoes and to imagine what they are experiencing.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tamar-birckhead/obama-reelection_b_2100111.html

[JohnR! 5,495]

He is now the newest and most suave member of the Equant posse...

He's been thrown out of the Middle Of The Road Club for being an imposter.

[Teddy B 17,251]

Why Obama Won: The Empathy Factor

What is the common denominator, the central thread running through these policy choices? It's not just compassion, defined as a sympathetic awareness of others' distress together with a desire to alleviate it; it's empathy -- the action of understanding, being aware of, being sensitive to, and vicariously experiencing the feelings, thoughts and experience of another.

In other words, empathy is not merely feeling sorry for those who are less fortunate and wanting to help them, but it's being able to put oneself in another's shoes and to imagine what they are experiencing.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tamar-birckhead/obama-reelection_b_2100111.html

BS!

Obama won because the Republicans had 8 years to run the country in the ground and people were tired of it and wanted a change. It's no different than why the Republicans just gained control of the house in the midterms, people were ready for a change. People don't have great attention spans and look for change regularly.

[JohnR! 5,495]

You forgot one more item. Obama won because the majority of the American people voted for the him. 'Nuff said.

BS!

Obama won because the Republicans had 8 years to run the country in the ground and people were tired of it and wanted a change. It's no different than why the Republicans just gained control of the house in the midterms, people were ready for a change. People don't have great attention spans and look for change regularly.

Edited November 12, 2014 by JohnR!

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

You're about as moderate as Marvin is white.

Marvin does act white. So yes i must be a moderate

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

He's been thrown out of the Middle Of The Road Club for being an imposter.

You are testing me again

Unrelated. I just took an old hot tub to the dump

You guys ever get a stink in your nose and it will not come out. Jezzez

True. Liberals put their heart where their issues are whereas the other side lives off of pure histrionics and unfettered Brobdingnagian displays of knee-jerk unfounded outrage.

exactly. Liberals react with the heart and conservatives use history and data and facts and other stuff you libanistas find silly.

You nailed it . Glad you agree

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

He is now the newest and most suave member of the Equant posse...

Don't we have a say in who gets to join?