Emotions are an important feature of representation, as they allow politicians to reflect the feelings of their constituents. Yet studies of elites’ use of emotions have been confined to examinations of strategic incentives. We build on these studies by incorporating elites’ group identities as a theoretical consideration. Our theory blends perspectives on the group identities of partisanship, gender, and race with political psychology research on emotions. We hypothesize that Republicans use more fear and disgust language than Democrats, that women candidates use more joy language than men candidates, and that Black candidates use less anger than white candidates. We test these hypotheses by applying emotional sentiment dictionaries to a corpus of primary candidates’ speeches. The evidence supports our claim that Republicans use more fear and that women use more joy, but we find no significant differences in the use of disgust and anger language by partisanship and race, respectively.
AlbertsonB.GadarianS. K. (2015). Anxious politics: Democratic citizenship in a threatening world. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781139963107
2.
BakkerB. N.SchumacherG.GothreauC.ArceneauxK. (2020). Conservatives and liberals have similar physiological responses to threats. Nature Human Behavior, 4(6), 613–621. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-0823-z
3.
BanksA. J. (2014). Anger and racial politics: The emotional foundation of racial attitudes in America. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781107279247
4.
BanksA. J.BellM. A. (2013). Racialized campaign ads: The emotional content in implicit racial appeals primes white attitudes. Public Opinion Quarterly, 77(2), 549–560. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nft010
BanksA. J.WhiteI. K.McKenzieB. D. (2019). Black politics: How anger influences the political actions blacks pursue to reduce racial inequality. Political Behavior, 41(4), 917–943. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-018-9477-1
7.
BartelsL. M. (2020). Ethnic antagonism erodes Republicans’ commitment to democrac. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(37), 22752–22759. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2007747117
8.
BauerN. M. (2020). Shifting standards: How voters evaluate the qualifications of female and male candidates. Journal of Politics, 82(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1086/705817
BenoitW. L.RillL. (2012). A functional analysis of 2008 presidential primary TV spots. Speaker and Gavel, 49(1), 55–67.
11.
BerelsonB. R.LazarsfeldP. F.McPheeW. N. (1954). Voting: A study of opinion formation in a presidential campaign. University of Chicago Press.
12.
BorahP. (2016). Political Facebook use: Campaign strategies used in 2008 and 2012 presidential elections. Journal of Information Technology and Politics, 13(4), 326–338. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2016.1163519
13.
BraderT. (2005). Striking a responsive chord: How political ads motivate and persuade voters by appealing to emotions. American Journal of Political Science, 49(2), 388–405. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0092-5853.2005.00130.x
14.
BraderT. (2006). Campaigning for hearts and minds: How emotional appeals in political ads work. University of Chicago Press.
15.
BraderT.ValentinoN. A.SuhayE. (2008). What triggers public opposition to immigration? Anxiety, group cues, and immigration threat. American Journal of Political Science, 54(4), 959–978. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2008.00353.x
16.
Canes-WroneBBradyDCoganJ.F. (2002). Out of step, out of office: Electoral accountability and House members’ voting. American Political Science Review, 96(1), 127–140. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055402004276
17.
CarneyD. R.JostJ. T.GoslingS. D.PotterJ. (2008). The secret lives of liberals and conservatives: Personality profiles, interaction styles and the things they leave behind. Political Psychology, 26(6), 807–840. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2008.00668.x
18.
CliffordS.JeritJ.RaineyC.MotylM. (2015). Moral concerns and policy attitudes: Investigating the influence of elite rhetoric. Political Communication, 32(2), 229–248. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2014.944320
19.
ConverseP. (1964). The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In ApterD. (Ed.), Ideology and discontent. Free Press.
20.
ConwayB. A.KenskiK.WangD. (2015). The rise of Twitter in the political campaign: Searching for intermedia agenda-setting effects in the presidential primary. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 20(4), 363–380. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12124
21.
Conway-SilvaB. A.FilerC. R.KenskiK.TsetsiE. (2018). Reassessing Twitter’s agenda-building power: An analysis of intermedia agenda-setting effects during the 2016 presidential primary season. Social Science Computer Review, 36(4), 469–483. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439317715430
22.
DolanJ.DeckmanM. M.SwersM. L. (2019). Women and politics: Paths to power and political influence. Rowman & Littlefield.
23.
DolanK. (2005). Do women candidates play to gender stereotypes? Do men candidates play to women? Candidate sex and issues priorities on campaign websites. Political Research Quarterly, 58(1), 31–44. https://doi.org/10.2307/3595593
24.
EcclesJ. S.JacobsJ. E.HaroldR. D. (1990). Gender role stereotypes, expectancy effects, and parents’ socialization of gender differences. Journal of Social Issues, 46(2), 183–201. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1990.tb01929.x
25.
EganP. J. (2020). Identity as dependent variable: How Americans shift their identities to align with their politics. American Journal of Political Science, 64(3), 699–716. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12496
26.
FeinbergM.AntonenkoO.WillerR.HorbergE. J.JohnO. P. (2013). Gut check: Reappraisal of disgust helps explain liberal-conservative differences on issues of purity. Emotion, 14(3), 513–521. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033727
27.
FeinbergM.WillerR. (2019). Moral reframing: A technique for effective and persuasive communication across political divides. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 13(12), Article e12501. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12501
28.
FlowersJ. F.HaynesA. A.CrespinM. H. (2003). The media, the campaign, and the message. American Journal of Political Science, 47(2), 259–273. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5907.00018
GelmanA.HillJ. (2007). Data analysis using regression and multilevel/hierarchical models. Cambridge University Press.
31.
GorenP.FedericoC. M.KittilsonM. C. (2009). Source cues, partisan identities, and political value expression. American Journal of Political Science, 53(4), 805–820. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2009.00402.x
32.
GrahamJ.HaidtJ.NosekB.A. (2009). Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(5), 1029–1046. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015141
33.
GroenendykE. W.BanksA. J. (2014). Emotional rescue: How affect helps partisans overcome collective action problems. Political Psychology, 35(3), 359–378. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12045
34.
Harris-PerryM. (2011). Sister citizen: Shame, stereotypes, and Black women in America. Yale University Press.
35.
HartR. P. (2000). Campaign talk: Why elections are good for us. Princeton University Press.
HayesD. (2010). The dynamics of agenda convergence and the paradox of competitiveness in presidential campaigns. Political Research Quarterly, 63(3), 594–611. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912909331426
38.
HayesD.LawlessJ. L. (2016). Women on the run: Gender, media, and political campaigns in a polarized era. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781316336007
39.
HaynesA. A.FlowersJ. F.GurianP. (2002). Getting the message out: Candidate communication strategy during the invisible primary. Political Research Quarterly, 55(3), 633–652. https://doi.org/10.1177/106591290205500307
40.
HerrnsonP. S.LayJ. C.StokesA. K. (2003). Women running ‘as women’: Candidate gender, campaign issues, and voter-targeting strategies. The Journal of Politics, 65(1), 244–255. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2508.t01-1-00013
41.
HetheringtonM. J.WeilerJ. D. (2009). Authoritarianism and polarization in American politics. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511802331
42.
HuddyL.TerkildsenN. (1993). Gender stereotypes and the perception of male and female candidates. American Journal of Political Science, 37(1), 119–147. https://doi.org/10.2307/2111526
43.
HughesD. (2003). Correlates of african American and Latino parents’ messages to children about ethnicity and race: A comparative study of racial socialization. American Journal of Community Psychology, 31(1–2), 15–33. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1023066418688
44.
HughesD.ChenL. (1997). When and what parents tell children about race: An examination of race-related socialization among African American families. Applied Developmental Science, 1(4), 200–214. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532480xads0104_4
45.
InbarY.PizarroD. A.BloomP. (2009). Conservatives are more easily disgusted than liberals. Cognition and Emotion, 23(4), 714–725. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930802110007
46.
InbarY.PizarroD. A.BloomP. (2012). Disgusting smells cause decreased liking of gay men. Emotion, 12(1), 23–27. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023984
47.
JamiesonK. H. (1995). Beyond the double bind: Women and leadership. Oxford University Press.
48.
JardinaA. (2019). White identity politics. Cambridge University Press.
JostJ. T.KruglanskiA. W.GlaserJ.SullowayF. J. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129(3), 339–375. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.3.339
51.
JostJ. T.SternC.RuleN. O.SterlingJ. (2017). The politics of fear: Is there an ideological asymmetry in existential motivation?Social Cognition, 35(4), 324–353. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2017.35.4.324
52.
LawlessJ. L (2004). Politics of presence? Congresswomen and symbolic representation. Political Research Quarterly, 57(1), 81. https://doi.org/10.2307/3219836
LeeY.ChenM. (2020). Emotional framing of news on sexual assault and partisan user engagement behaviors. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 98(2), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699020916434
57.
LernerJ. S.KeltnerD. (2000). Beyond valence: Toward a model of emotion-specific influences on judgment and choice. Cognition and Emotion, 14(4), 473–493. https://doi.org/10.1080/026999300402763
58.
MacWilliamsM. (2016). Who decides when the party doesn’t? Authoritarian voters and the rise of Donald Trump. PS: Political Science & Politics, 49(4), 716–721. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1049096516001463
MarcusG. E.SullivanJ. L.Theiss-MorseE.StevensD. (2005). The emotional foundation of political cognition: The impact of extrinsic anxiety on the formation of political tolerance judgments. Political Psychology, 26(6), 949–963. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2005.00452.x
63.
MargolisM. F. (2018). How politics affects religion: Partisanship, socialization, and religiosity in America. The Journal of Politics, 80(1), 30–43. https://doi.org/10.1086/694688
MasonL.WronskiJ.KaneJ. V. (2021). Activating animus: The uniquely social roots of Trump support. American Political Science Review. (Online).
66.
McDonaldJ. (2021). Who cares? Explaining perceptions of compassion in candidates for office. Political Behavior, 43(4), 1371–1394. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-020-09592-8
67.
McThomasM.TeslerM. (2016). The growing influence of gender attitudes on public support for Hillary Clinton, 2018–2012. Politics and Gender, 12(1), 28–49. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X15000562
MurrayG. R.MulvaneyM. K. (2012). Parenting styles, socialization, and the transmission of political ideology and partisanship. Politics & Policy, 40(6), 1106–1130. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2012.00395.x
70.
NewhagenJ. E. (1998). TV news images that induce anger, fear, and disgust: Effects on approach‐avoidance and memory. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 42(2), 265–276. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838159809364448
71.
OlivolaC. Y.SussmanA. B.TsetsosK.KangO. E.TodorovA. (2012). Republicans prefer Republican-looking leaders: Political facial stereotypes predict candidate electoral success among right-leaning voters. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3(5), 605–613. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550611432770
RidoutT. N.SearlesK. (2011). It’s my campaign I’ll cry if I want to: How and when campaigns use emotional appeals. Political Psychology, 32(3), 439–458. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2010.00819.x
77.
SapiroV.Cramer WalshK.StrachP.HenningsV. (2011). Gender, context, and television advertising: A comprehensive analysis of 2000 and 2002 House races. Political Research Quarterly, 64(1), 107–119. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912909343583
78.
SchaffnerB. F. (2005). Priming gender: Campaigning on women’s issues in U.S. Senate elections. American Journal of Political Science, 49(4), 803–817. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2005.00156.x
79.
ScottZ. A. (2021a). Lost in the crowd: The effect of volatile fields on presidential primaries. American Politics Research, 49(2), 221–232. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673x20959618
80.
ScottZ. A. (2021b). Courting coverage: Rhetorical newsworthiness cues and candidate-media agenda convergence in presidential primaries. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1177/10776990211058787
81.
SeifertE. J. (2012). The politics of authenticity in presidential campaigns: 1976-2008. McFarland & Company, Inc.
82.
SmithK. B.OxleyD.HibbingM. V.AlfordJ. R.HibbingJ. R. (2011). Disgust sensitivity and the neurophysiology of left-right political orientations. Plos One, 6(10), Article e25552. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0025552
83.
StegerW. P.HickmanJ.YohnK. (2002). Candidate competition and attrition in presidential primaries, 1912-2000. American Politics Research, 30(5), 528–554. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673x02030005004
Stephens-DouganL. (2020). Race to the bottom: How racial appeals work in American politics. : University of Chicago Press.
86.
TetlockP. E. (1983). Accountability and complexity of thought. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(1), 74–83. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.45.1.74
87.
TremblayM. (2019). Political representation and emotions: The case of out self-identified LGB representatives in Canada. Representation, 55(2), 125–139. https://doi.org/10.1080/00344893.2019.1604421
88.
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. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022381610000939
89.
ValentinoN. A.BraderT.JardinaA. E. (2013). Immigration opposition among U.S. whites: General ethnocentrism or media priming of attitudes about Latinos?Political Psychology, 34(2), 149–166. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2012.00928.x
90.
ValentinoN. A.WayneC.OcenoM. (2018). Mobilizing sexism: The interaction of emotion and gender attitudes in the 2016 US presidential election. Public Opinion Quarterly, 82(S1), 799–821. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfy003
91.
VavreckL. (2009). The message matters: The economy and presidential campaigns. Princeton University Press.
92.
WellsC.ShahD. V.PevehouseJ. C.YangJ.PelledA.BoehmF.LukitoJ.GhoshS.SchmidtJ. L. (2016). How Trump drove the coverage to the nomination: Hybrid media campaigning. Political Communication, 33(4), 669–676. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2016.1224416
93.
WestD. M. (2010). Air wars: Television advertising in election campaigns, 1952-2008 (5th ed.). CQ Press.
94.
WingfieldA. H. (2007). The modern mammy and the angry Black man: African American professionals’ experiences with gendered racism in the workplace. Race, Gender, & Class, 14(1), 196–212. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41675204
95.
WittS. D. (1997). Parental influence on children's socialization to gender roles. Adolescence, 32(126), 253–259.
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.
