Are Leftists More Emotion-Driven Than Rightists? The Interactive Influence of Ideology and Emotions on Support for Policies

Abstract

Although emotions and ideology are important factors guiding policy support in conflict, their interactive influence remains unclear. Based on prior findings that ideological leftists’ beliefs are more susceptible to change than rightists’ beliefs, we tested a somewhat counterintuitive extension that leftists would be more susceptible to influence by their emotional reactions than rightists. In three laboratory studies, inducing positive and negative emotions affected Jewish–Israeli leftists’, but not rightists’, support for conciliatory policies toward an adversarial (Studies 1 and 3) and a non-adversarial (Study 2) outgroup. Three additional field studies showed that positive and negative emotions were related to leftists’, but not rightists’, policy support in positive as well as highly negative conflict-related contexts, among both Jewish (Studies 4 and 5) and Palestinian (Study 6) citizens of Israel. Across different conflicts, emotions, conflict-related contexts, and even populations, leftists’ policy support changed in accordance with emotional reactions more than rightists’ policy support.

Keywords

emotion ideology conflict political psychology intergroup processes

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Altemeyer

(1996). The authoritarian specter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Banks

A. J.

Bell

M. A.

(2013). Racialized campaign ads: The emotional content in implicit racial appeals primes White racial attitudes. Public Opinion Quarterly, 77, 549-560.

Bar-Tal

(2000). Shared beliefs in a society: Social psychological analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Bar-Tal

(2013). Intractable conflicts: Socio-psychological foundations and dynamics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Bar-Tal

Halperin

(2011). Socio-psychological barriers to conflict resolution. In Bar-Tal

(Ed.), Intergroup conflicts and their resolution: Social psychological perspective (pp. 217-240). New York, NY: Psychology Press.

Bar-Tal

Raviv

Dgani-Hirsch

(2009). The influence of the ethos of conflict on the Israeli Jews’ interpretation of Jewish–Palestinian encounters. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 53, 94-118.

Bar-Tal

Sharvit

Halperin

Zafran

(2012). Ethos of conflict: The concept and its measurement. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 18(1), 40-61.

Čehajić

Brown

González

(2009). What do I care? Perceived ingroup responsibility and dehumanization as predictors of empathy felt for the victim group.Group Processes & Intergroup Relations,12(6), 715-729.

Cikara

Bruneau

E. G.

Saxe

R. R.

(2011). Us and them: Intergroup failures of empathy. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20, 149-153.

10.

Cohen-Chen

Halperin

Crisp

R. J.

Gross

J. J.

(2014). Hope in the Middle East malleability beliefs, hope, and the willingness to compromise for peace. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 5(1), 67-75.

11.

Cohrs

J. C.

(2012). Ideological bases of violent conflict. In Tropp

(Ed.), The Oxford handbook of intergroup conflict (pp. 53-71). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

12.

Crites

S. L.

Fabrigar

L. R.

Petty

R. E.

(1994). Measuring the affective and cognitive properties of attitudes: Conceptual and methodological issues. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 619-634.

13.

Federico

C. M.

(2009). How people organize their political attitudes: The roles of ideology, expertise, and evaluative motivation. Psychological Science Agenda, 23(9). Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/science/about/psa/2009/09/sci-brief.aspx

14.

Fischer

A. H.

Roseman

I. J.

(2007). Beat them or ban them: The characteristics and social functions of anger and contempt. Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 103-115. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.93.1.103

15.

Frijda

N. H.

Kuipers

ter Schure

(1989). Relations among emotion, appraisal and action tendency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 212-228.

16.

Frijda

N. H.

Manstead

A. S.

Bem

(Eds.). (2000). Emotions and beliefs: How feelings influence thoughts. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

17.

Graham

Haidt

Nosek

B. A.

(2009). Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 1029-1046.

18.

Halperin

(2011). Emotional barriers to peace: Emotions and public opinion of Jewish Israelis about the peace process in the Middle East. Peace and Conflict, 17(1), 22-45.

19.

Halperin

Gross

(2011). Intergroup anger in intractable conflict: Long-term sentiments predict anger responses during the Gaza war. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 14, 477-488.

20.

Halperin

Porat

Wohl

M. J.

(2013). Extinction threat and reciprocal threat reduction: Collective angst predicts willingness to compromise in intractable intergroup conflicts. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 16(6), 797-813.

21.

Halperin

Russell

A. G.

Dweck

C. S.

Gross

J. J.

(2011). Anger, hatred, and the quest for peace: Anger can be constructive in the absence of hatred. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 55, 274-291.

22.

Hayes

A. F.

(2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

23.

How to create a leftist. (2012, January 25). Eishton. Retrieved from http://eishton.wordpress.com/2012/01/25/how2buildaleftie/ (In Hebrew).

24.

Inbar

Pizarro

D. A.

Bloom

(2009). Conservatives are more easily disgusted than liberals. Cognition & Emotion, 23, 714-725.

25.

Jost

J. T.

Amodio

D. M.

(2012). Political ideology as motivated social cognition: Behavioral and neuroscientific evidence. Motivation and Emotion, 36(1), 55-64.

26.

Jost

J. T.

Federico

C. M.

Napier

J. L.

(2009). Political ideology: Its structure, functions, and elective affinities. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 307-337.

27.

Kashdan

T. B.

Rottenberg

(2010). Psychological flexibility as a fundamental aspect of health. Clinical Psychology Review, 30, 865-878.

28.

Kroeger

J. J.

(2005, August 7). The Republican Nemesis; democrats and progressives need to develop political emotional intelligence. OpEdNews. Retrieved from http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_james_j__050807_the_republican_nemes.htm

29.

Lerner

J. S.

Gonzalez

R. M.

Small

D. A.

Fischhoff

(2003). Effects of fear and anger on perceived risks of terrorism: A national field experiment. Psychological Science, 14, 144-150.

30.

Mackie

D. M.

Devos

Smith

E. R.

(2000). Intergroup emotions: Explaining offensive actions in an intergroup context. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 602-616.

31.

Porat

Halperin

Bar-Tal

(2013). The effect of socio-psychological barriers on the processing of new information about peace opportunities. Journal of Conflict Resolution. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/0022002713499719

32.

Roccas

Klar

Liviatan

(2006). The paradox of group-based guilt: Modes of national identification, conflict vehemence, and reactions to the in-group’s moral violations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 698-711.

33.

Rokeach

(1960). The open and closed mind. Oxford, UK: Basic Books.

34.

Saguy

Dovidio

J. F.

Pratto

(2008). Beyond contact: Intergroup contact in the context of power relations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 432-445.

35.

Saguy

Tausch

Dovidio

J. F.

Pratto

(2009). The irony of harmony: Intergroup contact can produce false expectations for equality. Psychological Science, 20, 114-121.

36.

Schultz

Searleman

(2002). Rigidity of thought and behavior: 100 years of research. Genetic, Social & General Psychology Monographs, 128, 165-207.

37.

See

Y. H. M.

Petty

R. E.

Fabrigar

L. R.

(2013). Affective–cognitive meta-bases versus structural bases of attitudes predict processing interest versus efficiency. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 1111-1123.

38.

Skitka

L. J.

Bauman

C. W.

Aramovich

N. P.

Morgan

G. S.

(2006). Confrontational and preventative policy responses to terrorism: Anger wants a fight and fear wants “them” to go away. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 28, 375-384.

39.

Skitka

L. J.

Mullen

Griffin

Hutchinson

Chamberlin

(2002). Dispositions, scripts, or motivated correction?: Understanding ideological differences in explanations for social problems. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 470-487.

40.

Snyder

C. R.

(1994). The psychology of hope: You can get there from here. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.

41.

Solak

Jost

J. T.

Sümer

Clore

G. L.

(2012). Rage against the machine: The case for system-level emotions. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 6, 674-690.

42.

Spanovic

Lickel

Denson

T. F.

Petrovic

(2010). Fear and anger as predictors of motivation for intergroup aggression: Evidence from Serbia and Republika Srpska. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 13, 725-739.

43.

Stone

W. F.

Smith

L. D.

(1993). Authoritarianism: Left and right. In Stone

W. F.

Lederer

Christie

(Eds.), Strength and weakness (pp. 144-156). New York, NY: Springer.

44.

Tam

Hewstone

Kenworthy

J. B.

Cairns

Marinetti

Geddes

Parkinson

(2008). Postconflict reconciliation: Intergroup forgiveness and implicit biases in Northern Ireland.Journal of Social Issues,64(2), 303-320.

45.

Tetlock

P. E.

(1983). Cognitive style and political ideology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 118-126.

46.

Tomkins

S. S.

(1963). Left and right: A basic dimension of ideology and personality. In White

R. W.

(Ed.), The study of lives (pp. 388-411). Chicago, IL: Atherton.

47.

Yzerbyt

Dumont

Wigboldus

Gordijn

(2003). I feel for us: The impact of categorization and identification on emotions and action tendencies. British Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 533-549.

48.

Zaller

(1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

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.

0.00 MB

0.54 MB