Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T05:46:15.573Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Emotional Responses to Disturbing Political News: The Role of Personality*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 November 2016

Timothy J. Ryan ,
Matthew S. Wells  and
Brice D. L. Acree
Timothy J. Ryan
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA, e-mails: [email protected], [email protected]
Matthew S. Wells
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, Wabash College, Crawfordsville, IN 47933, USA e-mail: [email protected]
Brice D. L. Acree
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA, e-mails: [email protected], [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Recent scholarship in political science identifies emotions as an important antecedent to political behavior. Existing work, however, has focused much more on the political effects of emotions than on their causes. Here, we begin to examine how personality moderates emotional responses to political events. We hypothesized that the personality trait need for affect (NFA) would moderate the emotions evoked by disturbing political news. Drawing data from a survey experiment conducted on a national sample, we find that individuals high in NFA have an especially vivid emotional response to disturbing news—a moderating relationship that has the potential to surpass those associated with symbolic attachments.

Keywords

Personalityneed for affectemotions
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Experimental Political Science , Volume 3 , Issue 2 , Winter 2016 , pp. 174 - 184
Copyright
Copyright © The Experimental Research Section of the American Political Science Association 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

We acknowledge the Gerald R. Ford Fellowship and the Rackham Graduate Student Research Grant at the University of Michigan for research support, and we thank Kevin Arceneaux for comments on an earlier draft. Errors are our own.

References

REFERENCES

Albertson, Bethany and Gadarian, Shana K.. 2013. “Who's Afraid of Immigration? The Effects of Pro- and Anti-Immigrant Threatening Ads among Latinos, African Americans, and Whites.” In Immigration and Public Opinion in Liberal Democracies, ed. Freeman, Gary P., Hansen, Randall, and Leal, David L.. New York: Routledge, pp. 286–306.Google Scholar
Arceneaux, Kevin, and Vander Wielen, Ryan J.. 2013. “The Effects of Need for Cognition and Need for Affect on Partisan Evaluations.” Political Psychology 34 (1): 23–42.Google Scholar
Arceneaux, Kevin and Vander Wielen, Ryan J.. 2014. “Democratic Accountability for Some: Individual Differences in How Partisans Process Political Information.” Paper Presented at the Behavior Models of Politics Conference at Duke University, Durham, NC, October 10, 2014.Google Scholar
Bargh, John A, and Chartrand, Tanya L.. 1999. “The Unbearable Automaticity of Being.” American Psychologist 54 (7): 462–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolger, Niall and Schilling, Elizabeth A.. 1991. “Personality and the Problems of Everyday Life: The Role of Neuroticism in Exposure and Reactivity to Daily Stressors.” Journal of Personality 59 (3): 355–86.Google Scholar
Brader, Ted. 2006. Campaigning for Hearts and Minds. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Brader, Ted, and Valentino, Nicholas A.. 2007. “Identities, Interests, and Emotions: Symbolic Versus Material Wellsprings of Fear, Anger, and Enthusiasm.” In The Affect Effect, eds. Neuman, W. Russel, Marcus, George E., MacKuen, Michael, and Crigler, Ann N.. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 180–201.Google Scholar
Britt, Thomas W., Millard, Matthew R., Sundareswaran, Preetha T., and Moore, DeWayne. 2009. “Personality Variables Predict Strength-Related Attitude Dimensions Across Objects.” Journal of Personality 77 (3): 859–82.Google Scholar
Cacioppo, John T. and Petty, Richard E.. 1992. “The Need for Cognition.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 42 (1): 116–31.Google Scholar
Cacioppo, John T., Petty, Richard E., Feinstein, Jeffrey A., and Jarvis, W. Blair G.. 1996. “Dispositional Differences in Cognitive Motivation: the Life and Times of Individuals Varying in Need for Cognition.” Psychological Bulletin 119 (2): 197–253.Google Scholar
Gadarian, Shana Kushner. 2013. “Beyond the Water's Edge: Threat, Partisanship, and Media.” In The Political Psychology of Terrorism Fears, Sinclair, Samuel Justin and Antonius, Daviel, eds. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 67–84.Google Scholar
Gadarian, Shana Kushner. 2014. “Scary Pictures: How Terrorism Imagery Affects Voter Evaluations.” Political Communication 31 (2): 282–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gadarian, Shana Kushner and Albertson, Bethany. 2014. “Anxiety, Immigration, and the Search for Information.” Political Psychology 35 (2): 133–64.Google Scholar
Gerber, Alan S., Huber, Gregory A., Doherty, David, and Dowling, Conor M.. 2012. “Disagreement and the Avoidance of Political Discussion: Aggregate Relationships and Differences Across Personality Traits.” American Journal of Political Science 56 (4): 849–74.Google Scholar
Gerber, Alan S. et al. 2010. “Personality and Political Attitudes: Relationships Across Issue Domains and Political Contexts.” American Political Science Review 104 (01): 111–33.Google Scholar
Haddock, Geoffrey, Maio, Gregory R., Arnold, Karin, and Huskinson, Thomas. 2008. “Should Persuasion Be Affective or Cognitive? the Moderating Effects of Need for Affect and Need for Cognition.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 34 (6): 769–78.Google Scholar
Huddy, Leonie, Feldman, Stanley, and Cassese, Erin. 2007. “On the Distinct Political Effects of Anxiety and Anger.” In The Affect Effect, Neuman, W. Russell, Marcus, George E., Crigler, Ann N., and MacKuen, Michael, eds. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 202–230.Google Scholar
John, Oliver P. and Eng, Joshua. 2013. “Three Approaches to Individual Differences in Affect Regulation: Conceptualizations, Measures, and Findings.” In The Handbook of Emotion Regulation. 2nd ed., Gross, James J., ed. New York: Guilford Press, pp. 321–345.Google Scholar
John, Oliver P. and Robins, Richard W.. 1993. “Gordon Allport: Father and Critic of the Five-Factor Model.” In Fifty Years of Personality Psychology, Craik, Kenneth H., Hogan, Robert, and Wolfe, Raymond N., eds. New York: Plenum, pp. 215–36.Google Scholar
Leone, Luigi and Chirumbolo, Antonio. 2008. “Conservatism as Motivated Avoidance of Affect: Need for Affect Scales Predict Conservatism Measures.” Journal of Research in Personality 42 (3): 755–62.Google Scholar
Maio, Gregory R. and Esses, Victoria M.. 2001. “The Need for Affect: Individual Differences in the Motivation to Approach or Avoid Emotions.” Journal of Personality 69 (4): 583–615.Google Scholar
Maio, Gregory R., Esses, Victoria M., Arnold, Karin, and Olson, James M.. 2004. “The Function-Structure Model of Attitudes: Incorporating the Need for Affect.” In Contemporary Perspectives on the Psychology of Attitudes, Haddock, Geoffrey and Maio, Gregory R., eds. New York: Psychology Press, pp. 9–34.Google Scholar
Marcus, George E., Neuman, W. Russell, and MacKuen, Michael. 2000. Affective Intelligence and Political Judgment. 1st ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Matthews, Gerald, Deary, Ian J., and Whiteman, Martha C.. 1998. Personality Traits. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mondak, Jeffery J. 2010. Personality and the Foundations of Political Behavior. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Nardulli, Peter F. and Kuklinski, James H.. 2007. “Testing Some Implications of Affective Intelligence Theory at the Aggregate Level.” In The Affect Effect, Neuman, W. Russell, Marcus, George E., Crigler, Ann N., and MacKuen, Michael, eds. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 316–334.Google Scholar
Neuman, W. Russell, Marcus, George E., Crigler, Ann N., and MacKuen, Michael, eds. 2007. The Affect Effect: Dynamics of Emotion in Political Thinking and Behavior. Chicago: University Of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Petty, Richard E. and Cacioppo, John T.. 1986. Communication and Persuasion: Central and Peripheral Routes to Attitude Change. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Redlawsk, David P., ed. 2006. Feeling Politics. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Ryan, Timothy J. 2012. “What Makes Us Click? Demonstrating Incentives for Angry Discourse with Digital-Age Field Experiments.” The Journal of Politics 74 (4): 1138–52.Google Scholar
Smith, Craig A., and Ellsworth, Phoebe C.. 1985. “Patterns of Cognitive Appraisal in Emotion.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 48 (4): 813–38.Google Scholar
Valentino, Nicholas A., Banks, Antoine J., Hutchings, Vincent L., and Davis, Anne K.. 2009. “Selective Exposure in the Internet Age: The Interaction Between Anxiety and Information Utility.” Political Psychology 30 (4): 591–613.Google Scholar
Zeitzoff, Thomas. 2013. “Anger, Exposure to Violence and Intragroup Conflict: A ‘Lab in the Field’ Experiment in Southern Israel.” Political Psychology 35 (3): 309–35.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Ryan supplementary material

Ryan supplementary material 1

Download Ryan supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 1.6 MB