scholarly journals Evidence of Psychological Targeting but not Psychological Tailoring in Political Persuasion Around Brexit

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Walker ◽  
Stephen O’Neill ◽  
Lee de-Wit
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Psychological Characteristics ◽  
Political Decision ◽  
Moral Foundation ◽  
Political Values ◽  
Political Messages ◽  
Weak Evidence ◽  
Political Decisions ◽  
Political Decision Making ◽  
Political Persuasion

AbstractThere are numerous associations between psychological characteristics and political values, but it is unclear whether messages tailored to these psychological characteristics can influence political decisions. Two studies (N = 398, N = 395) tested whether psychological-based argument tailoring could influence participants’ decision-making. We constructed arguments based on the 2016 Brexit referendum; Remain supporters were presented with four arguments supporting the Leave campaign, tailored to reflect the participant’s strongest (/weakest) moral foundation (Loyalty or Fairness) or personality trait (Conscientiousness or Openness). We tested whether individuals scoring high on a trait would find the tailored arguments more persuasive than individuals scoring low on the same trait. We found clear evidence for targeting, particularly for Loyalty, but either no evidence or weak evidence, in the case of Conscientiousness, for tailoring. Overall, the results suggest that targeting political messages could be effective, but provide either no, or weak evidence that tailoring these messages influences political decision-making.

scholarly journals Evidence of Psychological Targeting but not Psychological Tailoring in Political Persuasion Around Brexit.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Walker ◽  
Stephen O'Neill ◽  
Lee de-Wit
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Psychological Characteristics ◽  
Political Decision ◽  
Moral Foundation ◽  
Political Values ◽  
Political Messages ◽  
Weak Evidence ◽  
Political Decisions ◽  
Political Decision Making ◽  
Political Persuasion

There are numerous associations between psychological characteristics and political values, but it is unclear whether targeting messages tailored to these psychological characteristics can influence political decisions. Two studies (N=398, N=395) tested whether psychological-based argument tailoring could influence participants’ decision-making. We constructed arguments based on the 2016 Brexit referendum; Remain supporters were presented with four arguments supporting the Leave campaign, tailored to reflect the participant’s strongest (/weakest) moral foundation (Loyalty or Fairness) or personality trait (Conscientiousness or Openness). We tested whether individuals scoring high on a trait would find the tailored arguments more persuasive than individuals scoring low on the same trait. We found clear evidence for targeting, particularly for Loyalty, but either no evidence or weak evidence, in the case of Conscientiousness for tailoring. Overall, the results suggest that targeting political messages could be effective, but provide either no, or weak evidence that tailoring these messages influences political decision-making.

The Biology of Political Decision Making

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aleksander Ksiazkiewicz ◽  
Seyoung Jung
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Belief Systems ◽  
Biological Rhythms ◽  
Human Diversity ◽  
Political Decision ◽  
Gene Environment ◽  
Research Philosophy ◽  
Political Decisions ◽  
Political Decision Making ◽  
Shed Light

The study of biology and politics is rapidly moving from being an isolated curiosity to being an integral part of the theories that political scientists propose. The necessity of adopting this interdisciplinary research philosophy will be increasingly apparent as political scientists seek to understand the precise mechanisms by which political decisions are made. To demonstrate this potential, scholars of biopolitics have addressed common misconceptions about biopolitics research (i.e., the nature-nurture dichotomy and biological determinism) and used different methods to shed light on political decision making since the turn of the 21st century—including methods drawn from evolutionary psychology, genomics, neuroscience, psychophysiology, and endocrinology. The field has already come far in its understanding of the biology of political decision making, and several key findings have emerged in biopolitical studies of political belief systems, attitudes, and behaviors. This area of research sheds light on the proximate and ultimate causes of political cognition and elucidates some of the ways in which human biology shapes both the human universals that make politics possible and the human diversity that provides it with such dynamism. Furthermore, three emerging areas of biopolitics research that anticipate the promise of a biologically informed political science are research into gene-environment interplay, research into the political causes and consequences of variation in human microbiomes, and research that integrates chronobiology—the study of the biological rhythms that regulate many aspects of life, including sleep—into the study of political decision making.

Transparency actually: how transparency affects public perceptions of political decision-making

2013 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 309-330 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jenny de Fine Licht
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Direct Effect ◽  
Public Perceptions ◽  
Final Decision ◽  
Political Decision ◽  
Original Experiment ◽  
External Sources ◽  
Political Decisions ◽  
Political Decision Making ◽  
Actual Decision

Building on a widely held account of transparency as integral to legitimate and successful governance, this article addresses the question of how transparency in decision-making can influence public perceptions of political decision-making. An original experiment with 1099 participants shows that people who perceive political decision-making to be transparent judge the degree of procedural fairness highly and are more willing to accept the final decision. Perceptions of transparency are, however, largely shaped by transparency cues (e.g. statements provided by external sources) rather than by the degree of actual transparency, and no direct effect of actual transparency can be found on decision acceptance. The implication is that it is difficult to influence people's acceptance of political decisions by means of transparency reforms, as people base their assessments of political decisions largely on considerations other than evalutations of actual decision-making procedures.

Framing and Political Decision Making: An Overview

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zoe Oxley
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Individual Characteristics ◽  
Poor People ◽  
Government Budget ◽  
Political Decision ◽  
Political Issue ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Government ◽  
Political Decisions ◽  
Political Decision Making

Political communicators have long used framing as a tactic to try to influence the opinions and political decisions of others. Frames capture an essence of a political issue or controversy, typically the essence that best furthers a communicator’s political goals. Framing has also received much attention by scholars; indeed, the framing literature is vast. In the domain of political decision making, one useful distinction is between two types of frames: emphasis frames and equivalence frames. Emphasis frames present an issue by highlighting certain relevant features of the issue while ignoring others. Equivalence frames present an issue or choice in different yet logically equivalent ways. Characterizing the issue of social welfare as a drain on the government budget versus a helping hand for poor people is emphasis framing. Describing the labor force as 95% employed versus 5% unemployed is equivalency framing. These frames differ not only by their content but also by the effects on opinions and judgements that result from frame exposure as well as the psychological processes that account for the effects. For neither emphasis nor equivalence frames, however, are framing effects inevitable. Features of the environment, such as the presence of competing frames, or individual characteristics, such as political predispositions, condition whether exposure to a specific frame will influence the decisions and opinions of the public.

scholarly journals Madrid at the center of the Spanish COVID-19 pandemic: the result of ill-advised political decision-making

2021 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alberto Ortiz ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
General Population ◽  
Hemodialysis Patients ◽  
Infection Rates ◽  
Political Decision ◽  
Dialysis Unit ◽  
Specific Data ◽  
Local Factors ◽  
Political Decisions ◽  
Political Decision Making

In this issue of the Portuguese Journal of Nephrology and Hypertension, Deira et al report on the epidemiology of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Spanish dialysis units outside the largest cities. This unique viewpoint allows to further trace the spread of the pandemic from Madrid, which became the epicenter of COVID-19 in Spain as a consequence of successive ill-advised political decisions. Deira et al further observed a disconnect between general population infection rates and dialysis unit infection rates in several provinces, pointing to local factors that should be identified and corrected prior to the next pandemic. Although they did not provide specific data on the topic, prior studies from Spain characterized shared healthcare transport to and for dialysis units as a key contributor to infection rates among hemodialysis patients.

scholarly journals Je kunt alleen vooruit roeien door achteruit te kijken. Pleidooi voor meer politiek in de archeologie en meer archeologie in de politiek

Paleo-aktueel ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 37-44
Author(s):  
Sandra Beckerman
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Political Debate ◽  
Political Decision ◽  
The Past ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Future ◽  
Speak Up ◽  
Political Decisions ◽  
Political Decision Making ◽  
Looking Back

You can only row forward by looking back. Our past is a complex story. It comprises the best and the worst, atrocities and liberations, grief and jubilation. Archaeology is indispensable for making reconstructions of that past, and knowing the past is vital for understanding the present and the future. “You row forward by looking back, and telling this history is part of helping people navigate toward the future,” Rebecca Solnit (2016) argues. Therefore, archaeology should play an important role in society. Although the role archaeology plays and can play is shaped by political decisions, archaeologists in the Netherlands are reluctant to engage in political decision making. The future of the past is too important to leave solely in the hands of politicians. Archaeology should play a more important role in society; therefore, archaeologists should speak up in the social and political debate.

scholarly journals Nonverbal Communication in Politics

2016 ◽  
Vol 60 (14) ◽  
pp. 1656-1675 ◽  
Author(s):  
Delia Dumitrescu
Keyword(s):  
Nonverbal Communication ◽  
Review Article ◽  
Political Decision ◽  
Political Messages ◽  
Verbal Arguments ◽  
And Behavior ◽  
Attitudes And Behavior ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Political Decisions ◽  
Political Decision Making

This article reviews research contributions in political science and communication to the topic of nonverbal communication and politics from 2005 to 2015. The review opens with research on the content of nonverbal communication, then considers studies examining what moderates the impact of nonverbal aspects of political messages on attitudes and behavior and the mechanisms that underpin these effects. Over the period reviewed here, research shows that the nonverbal channel is rich in political information and is consequential for political decision making, particularly under certain circumstances, such as in low-information conditions. Visuals affect political decisions through cognitive and emotional routes. This review article also identifies several directions where further research is required, particularly with regard to social media, nonvisual aspects of nonverbal communication, the interplay of visual and verbal arguments, and the mechanisms behind the effects of nonverbal communication.

Political Legitimacy Under Epistemic Constraints

2019 ◽  
pp. 147-173 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabienne Peter
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Public Reason ◽  
Political Legitimacy ◽  
Political Decision ◽  
The Public ◽  
Epistemic Constraints ◽  
The Right ◽  
Political Decisions ◽  
Political Decision Making

The aim of this chapter is to provide an epistemological argument for why public reasons matter for political legitimacy. A key feature of the public reason conception of legitimacy is that political decisions must be justified to the citizens. They must be justified in terms of reasons that are either shared qua reasons or that, while not shared qua reasons, support the same political decision. Call the relevant reasons public reasons. Critics of the public reason conception, by contrast, argue that political legitimacy requires justification simpliciter—political decisions must be justified in terms of the reasons that apply. Call the relevant reasons objective reasons. The debate between defenders and critics of a public reason conception of political legitimacy thus focuses on whether objective reasons or public reasons are the right basis for the justification of political decisions. I will grant to critics of a public reason conception that there are objective reasons and allow that such reasons can affect the legitimacy of political decisions. But I will show, focusing on the epistemic circumstances of political decision-making, that it does not follow that the justification of those decisions is necessarily in terms of those reasons.

Ideals and Actions: Do Citizens’ Patterns of Political Participation Correspond to their Conceptions of Democracy?

2014 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 234-260 ◽  
Author(s):  
Åsa Bengtsson ◽  
Henrik Christensen
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Political Participation ◽  
Citizen Participation ◽  
Political System ◽  
Political Decision ◽  
National Election Study ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Political Decisions ◽  
Political Decision Making

The interest in procedures for political decision-making has grown tremendously during recent decades. Given the intense scholarly debate and the implementation of greater opportunities for citizen participation in many democracies, there has been surprisingly little interest in citizens’ conceptions of democracy understood as their preferences concerning the processes by which the political system works. Some recent attempts do, however, suggest that it is important to expand the study of public opinion from policy output to decision-making processes, and that there are coherent patterns in citizens’ expectations of the way in which political decisions come about. What is not clear, though, is whether citizens’ different conceptions of democracy have repercussions for how they engage in politics. Using the Finnish National Election Study of 2011 (Borg and Grönlund 2011), this article explores the relationship between citizens’ conceptions of democracy and patterns of political participation. Results demonstrate a distinct association between citizens’ ideals and the actions they take.

Stereotyping and Political Decision Making

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bettina Spencer
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Sense Of Self ◽  
Self Esteem ◽  
Leadership Position ◽  
Political Decision ◽  
Self Worth ◽  
Political Decisions ◽  
Political Decision Making

Stereotypes are overgeneralized, often inaccurate, characterizations of a group and its members. Because stereotypes rely on heuristics, they can occur unconsciously and shape behavior in multiple ways. People may stereotype in order to quickly characterize a person or a group of people, or they may be motivated to deliberately stereotype in order to maintain their own self-esteem and sense of self-worth. Stereotypes can undermine many facets of our behavior and beliefs, including how we make political decisions. For example, people who stereotype women as being nurturing and in need of protection may be less inclined to vote for a women running for a leadership position. Because stereotypes are so pervasive and learned early, they can be particularly difficult to reduce or eliminate, and people will often look for evidence to support their attitudes rather than actively challenging the stereotype. However, stereotype reduction is possible and can be done both consciously and unconsciously.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document