Individual-level indicators of populist attitudes vary from basic demographic factors to complex psychological dimensions. However, only a handful of studies have examined how emotions shape populist attitudes. To address this gap, and using observational data from Turkey, a context driven by strong polarization and populist politics, this study first examines how emotions—specifically, anger and enthusiasm—motivate distinct routes to populist attachment. It then explores the conditional effects of emotions in connection with political ideology and a conspiracy mindset. The results demonstrate, first, that anger is closely related to populist attitudes in contrast to enthusiasm, which is associated with weaker populist attitudes. Second, in the context of Turkey, where a populist party has been in power, there is an ideological asymmetry in that those on the political right are more influenced by anger than enthusiasm. Third, these emotions are potentially more effective in altering the populist views of those with low levels of conspiratorial mindset. Contributing to the literature on the connection between emotions and populism, this study presents evidence on how anger and enthusiasm influence populist preferences in a polarized country.
AbramowitzA. I.WebsterS. W. (2016). The rise of negative partisanship and the nationalization of U.S. elections in the 21st century. Electoral Studies, 14, 12–22.
2.
AkkermanA.MuddeC.ZasloveA. (2014). How populist are the people? measuring populist attitudes in voters. Comparative Political Studies, 47(9), 1324–1353.
3.
AlperS.BayrakF.YilmazO. (2022). Psychological correlates of covid-19 conspiracy beliefs and preventive measures: Evidence from turkey. Current Psychology, 40(11), 5708–5717.
AytacE.ÖnişZ. (2014). Varieties of populism in a changing global context: The divergent paths of Erdogan and Kirchnerismo. Comparative Politics, 47(1), 41–59.
6.
AytacE. S.ÇarkoğluA.ElçiE. (2025). Populist appeals, emotions, and political mobilisation. American Behavioral Scientist, Triple Special Issue “The Emotional Side of Populist Support: Key Affective Mechanisms at Test. Part Two”, 69(5), 507–525.
BanksA. (2014). The public’s anger: White racial attitudes and opinions toward health care reform. Political Behavior, 36(3), 493–514.
9.
BraderT.ValentinoN. A.SuhayE. (2008). What triggers public opposition to immigration? Anxiety, group cues, and immigration threat. American Journal of Political Science, 52(4), 959–978.
10.
BruderM.HaffkeP.NeaveN.NouripanahN.ImhoffR. (2013). Measuring individual differences in generic beliefs in conspiracy theories across cultures: Conspiracy mentality questionnaire. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 225. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00225
11.
CanovanM. (1981). Populism. Junction Books.
12.
CanovanM. (1999). Trust the people! Populism and the two faces of democracy. Political Studies, 47, 2–16.
13.
CapelosT.ChronaS. (2018). The map to the heart: An analysis of political affectivity in turkey. Politics and Governance, 6(4), 144–158.
14.
CapelosT.DemertzisN. (2022). Sour grapes: Ressentiment as the affective response of grievance politics. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 35(1), 107–129.
15.
CarverC. S.Harmon-JonesE. (2009). Anger is an approach-related affect: Evidence and implications. Psychological Bulletin, 135(2), 183–204.
16.
Castanho SilvaB.AndreadisI.AnduizaE.BlanušaN.CortiY. M.DelfinoG.RicoG.RuthS.SpruytB.SteenbergenM.LittvayL. (2018). Public opinion surveys: A new scale. In HawkinsK. A.CarlinR.LittvayL.Rovira KaltwasserC. (Eds.), The ideational approach to populism: Theory, method and analysis (pp. 150–179). Routledge.
17.
Castanho SilvaB.JungkunzS.HelblingM.LittvayL. (2019). An empirical comparison of seven populist attitudes scales. Political Research Quarterly, 73(2), 409–424.
18.
Castanho SilvaB.VegettiF.LittvayL. (2017). The elite is up to something: Exploring the relation between populism and belief in conspiracy theories. Swiss Political Science Review, 23(4), 423–443.
19.
ClaassenC. (2016). Group entitlement, anger and participation in intergroup violence. British Journal of Political Science, 46(1), 127–148.
20.
DemasiC.McCoyJ.LittvayL. (2025). Influencing people’s populist attitudes with rhetoric and emotions: An online experiment in the U.S. American Behavioral Scientist., Triple Special Issue “The Emotional Side of Populist Support: Key Affective Mechanisms at Test. Part Two”, 69(5), 552–582.
21.
DemertzisN. (2006). Emotions and populism. In ClarkeS.HoggettP.ThompsonS. (Eds.), Emotion, politics and society (pp. 103–122). Palgrave Macmillan.
22.
ElciE. (2022). Politics of nostalgia and populism: Evidence from turkey. British Journal of Political Science, 52(2), 697–714.
23.
ElsterJ. (1999). Alchemies of the mind: Rationality and the emotions. Cambridge University Press.
24.
EndersA. M.UscinskiJ. E.SeeligM. I.KlofstadC. A.WuchtyS.FunchionJ. R.MurthiM. N.PremaratneK.StolerJ. (2021). The relationship between social media use and beliefs in conspiracy theories and misinformation. Political Behavior, 45, 781–804.
25.
ErisenC. (2018). Political behavior and the emotional citizen: Participation and reaction in turkey. Palgrave.
26.
ErisenC. (2022). Psychological foundations and behavioral consequences of COVID19 conspiracy theory beliefs: The Turkish case. International Political Science Review, 44(4), 587–606. https://doi.org/10.1177/01925121221084625
27.
ErisenC.GuidiM.MartiniS.ToprakkiranS.IserniaP.LittvayL. (2021). Psychological correlates of populist attitudes. Advances in Political Psychology, 42(S1), 149–171. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12768
28.
ErisenC.KubicekP. (2016). Conceptualizing democratic consolidation in Turkey. In ErisenC.KubicekP. (Eds.), Democratic consolidation in turkey: Micro and macro challenges (pp. 1–19). Routledge.
29.
ErisenC.LodgeM.TaberC. (2014). Affective contagion in effortful political thinking. Political Psychology, 35(2), 187–206.
30.
ErisenC.SarB. (2022). Conspiracy theory beliefs and anti-Americanism: The case of Turkey [Paper presentation]. International Society of Political Psychology Association Annual Meeting, Athens, Greece.
31.
ErisenC.VasilopoulouS. (2022). The affective model of far-right vote in Europe: Anger, political trust, and immigration. Social Science Quaterly, 103, 635–648. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.13153
32.
ErisenC.VasilopoulouS.Kentmen-CinC. (2020). Emotional reactions to immigration and support for EU cooperation on immigration and terrorism. Journal of European Public Policy, 27(6), 795–813.
33.
EsenB.GumuscuS. (2016). Rising competitive authoritarianism in Turkey. Third World Quarterly, 37(9), 1581–1606.
34.
FilsingerM. (2025). How anger shapes the relationship between social isolation and populist attitudes. American Behavioral Scientist., Triple Special Issue “The Emotional Side of Populist Support: Key Affective Mechanisms at Test. Part Two”, 69(5), 583–603.
35.
FrijdaN. H. (1986). The emotions. Cambridge University Press.
36.
HalperinE.Canetti-NisimD.Hirsch-HoeflerS. (2009). The central role of group-based hatred as an emotional antecedent of political intolerance: Evidence from Israel. Political Psychology, 30(1), 93–123.
37.
HatfieldE.JohnT. C.RapsonR. (1994). Emotional contagion. Cambridge University Press.
38.
HawkinsK. (2009). Is Chavez populist? Measuring populist discourse in comparative perspective. Comparative Political Studies, 42(8), 1040–1067.
39.
HawkinsK. (2010). Venezuela’s Chavismo and populism in comparative perspective. Cambridge University Press.
40.
HawkinsK. A.CarlinR.LittvayL.Rovira KaltwasserC. (2018). The ideational approach to populism: Theory, method and analysis. Routledge.
41.
HuddyL.FeldmanS.CasseseE. (2007). On the distinct political effects of anxiety and anger. In NeumanW. R.MarcusG. E.CriglerA. N.MacKuenM. (Eds.), The affect effect: Dynamics of emotion in political thinking and behavior (pp. 202–230). University of Chicago Press.
42.
JungkunzS.FaheyR. A.HinoA. (2021). How populist attitudes scales fail to capture support for populists in power. PLoS One, 16(12), 1–20.
43.
MacKuenM.WolakJ.KeeleL.MarcusG. E. (2010). Civic engagements: Resolute partisanship or reflective deliberation. American Journal of Political Science, 54(2), 440–458.
44.
MaherP. J.LüdersA.ErisenE.RooduijnM.JonasE. M. (2022). The many guises of populism and crisis: Introduction to the special issue on populism and global crises. Political Psychology, 43, 819–826.
45.
MarcusG. E. (2021). The rise of populism: The politics of justice, anger and grievance. In ForgasJ. P.CranoW.FiedlerK. (Eds.), The psychology of populism (pp. 81–104). Routledge.
46.
MarcusG. E. (2023). Evaluating the status of theories of emotion in political science and psychology. Frontiers in Political Science, 4, 1080884.
47.
MarcusG. E.MacKuenM. B. (1993). Anxiety, enthusiasm and the vote: The emotional underpinnings of learning and involvement during presidential campaigns. American Political Science Review, 87(3), 688–701.
48.
MarcusG. E.NeumanW. R.MacKuenM. (2000). Affective intelligence and political judgment. University of Chicago Press.
49.
MarcusG. E.ValentinoN. A.VasilopoulosP.FoucaultM. (2019). Applying the theory of affective intelligence to support for authoritarian policies and parties. Political Psychology, 40, 109–139.
50.
MasonL. (2015). “I disrespectfully agree”: The differential effects of partisan sorting on social and issue polarization. American Journal of Political Science, 59(1), 128–145. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12089
51.
McCoyJ.RahmanT.SomerM. (2018). Polarization and the global crisis of democracy: Common patterns, dynamics, and pernicious consequences for democratic polities. American Behavioral Scientist, 62(1), 16–42.
52.
MuddeC. (2002). The ideology of the extreme right. Manchester University Press.
53.
MuddeC. (2004). The populist Zeitgeist. Government and Opposition, 39(4), 542–563.
54.
MuddeC.Rowira KaltwasserC. (2013). Exclusionary versus inclusionary populism: Comparing contemporary Europe and Latin America. Government and Opposition, 48(2), 147–174.
55.
MüllerJ.-W. (2016). What is populism?University of Pennsylvania Press.
56.
NefesT. S. (2018). The conspiratorial style in Turkish politics: Discussing the deep state in the parliament. In UscinskiJ. E. (Ed.), Conspiracy theories and the people who believe them (pp. 385–395). Oxford University Press.
57.
OliverE.WoodT. J. (2014). Conspiracy theories and the paranoid style(s) of mass opinion. American Journal of Political Science, 58, 952–966.
58.
OrtonyA.CloreG. L.CollinsA. M. (1988). The cognitive structure of emotions. Cambridge University Press.
59.
PapaioannouK.PantaziM.van ProoijenJ.-W. (2023). Is democracy under threat? Why belief in conspiracy theories predicts autocratic attitudes. European Journal of Social Psychology, 53(5), 846–856. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2939
RicoG. (2025). Ideological identification, threat type, and differences in how anger and fear relate to anti-immigrant and populist attitudes. American Behavioral Scientist, Triple Special Issue “The Emotional Side of Populist Support: Key Affective Mechanisms at Test. Part Three”, 69(14), 1735–1753.
62.
RicoG.GuinjoanM.AnduizaE. (2017). The emotional underpinnings of populism: How anger and fear affect populist attitudes. Swiss Political Science Review, 23(4), 444–461.
63.
RooduijnM. (2014). The nucleus of populism: In search of the lowest common denominator. Government and Opposition, 49(4), 573–599.
64.
Rovira KaltwasserC. (2021). Bringing political psychology into the study of populism. Philosophical Transactions, 376(1822), 20200148. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2020.0148
65.
SchulzA.MüllerP.SchemerC.WirzD. S.WettsteinM.WirthW. (2017). Measuring populist attitudes on three dimensions. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 30(2), 316–326.
66.
SchumacherG.RooduijnM.BakkerB. N. (2022). Hot populism? Affective responses to anti-establishment rhetoric. Political Psychology, 43, 851–871.
67.
SnidermanP. M.BrodyR. A.TetlockP. E. (1991). Reasoning and choice: Explorations in political psychology. Cambridge University Press.
68.
SpruytB.KeppensG.Van DroogenbroeckF. (2016). Who supports populism and what attracts people to it?Political Research Quarterly, 69(2), 335–346.
69.
SuhayE.ErisenC. (2018). The role of anger in the biased assimilation of political information. Political Psychology, 39(4), 793–810.
70.
ValentinoN. A.BraderT.GroenendykE. W.GregorowiczK.HutchingsV. L. (2011). Election night’s alright for fighting: The role of emotions in political participation. The Journal of Politics, 73(1), 156–170.
van ProoijenJ.-W.Cohen RodriguesT.BunzelC.GeorgescuO.KomáromyD.KrouwelA. P. (2022). Populist gullibility: Conspiracy theories, news credibility, bullshit receptivity, and paranormal belief. Political Psychology, 43, 1061–1079. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12802
73.
van ProoijenJ.-W.JostmannN. (2013). Belief in conspiracy theories: The influence of uncertainty and perceived morality. European Journal of Social Psychology, 43, 109–115.
74.
van ZomerenM.SpearsR.FischerA. H.LeachC. (2004). Put your money where your mouth is! Explaining collective action tendencies through group-based anger and group efficacy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(5), 649–664.
75.
VasilopoulosP.JostJ. T. (2020). Psychological similarities and dissimilarities between left-wing and right-wing populists: Evidence from a nationally representative survey in France. Journal of Research in Personality, 88, 104004.
76.
VasilopoulosP.MarcusG. E.ValentinoN. A.FoucaultM. (2018). Fear, anger, and voting for the far right: Evidence from the November 13, 2015 Paris terror attacks. Political Psychology, 40(4), 679–704.
77.
VerbalyteM.BonansingaD.ExadaktylosT. (2022). When emotions run high: Affective responses to crises in Europe. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 35(1), 1–13.
78.
WebsterS. W. (2020). American rage: How anger shapes our politics. Cambridge University Press.
79.
WuttkeA.SchimpfC.SchoenH. (2020). When the whole is greater than the sum of its parts: On the conceptualization and measurement of populist attitudes and other multidimensional constructs. American Political Science Review, 114(2), 356–374.
80.
YilmazO.SaribayA.BahçekapılıH. G.HarmaM. (2016). Political orientations, ideological self-categorizations, party preferences and moral foundations of young Turkish voters. Turkish Politics, 17(4), 544–566.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
