This study explores how variation in voters’ personality traits, as represented by the Big Five framework, corresponded with variation in judgments regarding the leading presidential candidates during the 2016 nomination campaign. We argue that the context of a crowded field and an atypical candidate in the Republican nomination campaign activated personalistic criteria for candidate evaluation—voters’ own personality traits plausibly gave direction to their candidate assessments, and personality was a useful basis on which to differentiate between eventual winner Donald Trump and the other leading Republican competitors early in the primary process. Analyses make use of data from a large national survey fielded at the time of the Iowa caucuses. Results show that voters with a particular constellation of personality traits—high conscientiousness and extraversion, and low openness, agreeableness, and neuroticism—favored Donald Trump as compared with Ted Cruz, John Kasich, Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, Ben Carson, and the remainder of the Republican field.
AbramowitzA. I. (1989). Viability, electability, and candidate choice in a presidential primary election: A test of competing models. Journal of Politics, 51, 977-992.
ByrneD.GriffittW.StefaniakD. (1967). Attraction and similarity of personality characteristics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5, 82-90.
4.
CapraraG. V.BarbaranelliC.ConsiglioC.PicconiL.ZimbardoP. G. (2003). Personalities of politicians and voters: Unique and synergistic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 849-856.
5.
CapraraG. V.VecchioneM. (2013). Personality approaches to political behavior. In HuddyL.SearsD. O.LevyJ. S. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of political psychology (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
6.
CapraraG. V.ZimbardoP. G. (2004). Personalizing politics: A congruency model of political preference. American Psychologist, 59, 581-594.
7.
ChenP. G.PalmerC. L. (2018). The prejudiced personality? Using the Big Five to predict susceptibility to stereotyping behavior. American Politics Research, 46, 276-307.
8.
CohenM.CarolD.NoelH.ZallerJ. (2009). The party decides: Presidential nominations before and after reform. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
9.
CulbertG. (2015). Realizing “strategic” voting in presidential primaries. Rationality and Society, 27, 224-256.
DietrichB. J.LasleyS.MondakJ. J.RemmelM. L.TurnerJ. (2012). Personality and legislative politics: The Big Five trait dimensions among U.S. state legislators. Political Psychology, 33, 195-210.
13.
DitontoT. M.HamiltonA. J.RedlawskD. P. (2014). Gender stereotypes, information search, and voting behavior in political campaigns. Political Behavior, 36, 335-358.
14.
DuckittJ.SibleyC. G. (2010). Personality, ideology, prejudice, and politics: A dual-process motivational model. Journal of Personality, 78, 1861-1894.
15.
FeilerD. C.KleinbaumA. M. (2015). Popularity, similarity, and the network extraversion bias. Psychological Science, 26, 593-603.
16.
FunderD. C. (2008). Persons, situations, and person-situation interactions. In JohnO. P.RobinsR. W.PervinL. A. (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 568-580). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
17.
GerberA. S.HuberG. A.DohertyD.DowlingC. M. (2011). The Big Five personality traits in the political arena. Annual Review of Political Science, 14, 265-287.
18.
GoldbergL. R.1992. “The Development of Markers for the Big-Five Factor Structure.” Psychological Assessment, 4, 26-42.
19.
IzardC. E. (1960). Personality similarity and friendship. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 61, 47-51.
20.
IzardC. E. (1963). Personality similarity and friendship: A follow-up study. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66, 598-600.
21.
JohnO. P.NaumannL. P.SotoC. J. (2008). Paradigm shift to the integrative Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and conceptual issues. In JohnO. P.RobinsR. W.PervinL. A. (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
22.
MakseT.SokheyA. E. (2010). Revisiting the divisive primary hypothesis: 2008 and the Clinton—Obama nomination battle. American Politics Research, 38, 233-265.
23.
MassenJ. J. M.KoskiS. E. (2014). Chimps of a feather sit together: Chimpanzee friendships are based on homophily in personality. Evolution & Human Behavior, 35, 1-8.
MondakJ. J. (2010). Personality and the foundations of political behavior. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
29.
MondakJ. J.HalperinK. D. (2008). A framework for the study of personality and political behavior. British Journal of Political Science, 38, 335-362.
30.
MondakJ. J.HibbingM. V. (2012). Personality and public opinion. In BerinskyA. J. (Ed.), New directions in public opinion (pp. 217-238). New York, NY: Routledge.
31.
MondakJ. J.HibbingM. V.CanacheD.SeligsonM. A.AndersonM. R. (2010). Personality and civic engagement: An integrative framework for the study of trait effects on political behavior. American Political Science Review, 104, 85-110.
PerryR. (2013). On the dual process model of ideology and prejudice: Identifying causal personality effects and revising worldview measures (Doctoral dissertation). Aukland, NZ: University of Aukland Press.
34.
PerryR.SibleyC. G. (2012). Big-Five personality prospectively predicts social dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism. Personality and Individual Differences, 52, 3-8.
35.
RammstedtB.JohnO. P. (2007). Measuring personality in one minute or less: A 10-item short version of the Big Five Inventory in English and German. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 203-212.
36.
SelfhoutM.BurkW.BranjeS.DenissenJ.Van AkenM.MeeusW. (2010). Emerging late adolescent friendship networks and Big Five personality traits: A social network approach. Journal of Personality, 78, 509-538.
37.
SibleyC. G.DuckittJ. (2010). The personality bases of ideology: A one-year longitudinal study. Journal of Social Psychology, 150, 540-559.
38.
TeslerM.SearsD. O. (2010). Obama’s race: The 2008 election and the dream of a post- racial America. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
39.
TettR. P.BurnettD. D. (2003). A personality trait-based interactionist model of job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 500-517.
40.
TettR. P.GutermanH. A. (2000). Situation trait relevance, trait expression, and cross-situational consistency: Testing a principle of trait activation. Journal of Research in Personality, 34, 397-423.
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.
