Cognitive-Affective Styles of Biden and Trump Supporters: An Automated Text Analysis Study

Abstract

Are conservatives more simple-minded and happier than liberals? To revisit this question, 1,518 demographically diverse participants (52% females) were recruited from an online participant-sourcing platform and asked to write a narrative about the upcoming 2020 U.S. Presidential Election as well as complete self and candidates’ ratings of personality. The narratives were analyzed using three well-validated text analysis programs. As expected, extremely enthusiastic Trump supporters used less cognitively complex and more confident language than both their less enthusiastic counterparts and Biden supporters. Trump supporters also used more positive affective language than Biden supporters. More simplistic and categorical modes of thinking as well as positive emotional tone were also associated with positive perceptions of Trump’s, but not Biden’s personality. Dialectical complexity and positive emotional tone accounted for significant unique variance in predicting appraisals of Trump’s trustworthiness/integrity even after controlling for demographic variables, self-ratings of conscientiousness and openness, and political affiliation.

Keywords

cognitive-affective styles political preferences LIWC AutoIC FFM

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abe

J. A.

(2018). Personality and political preferences: The 2016 U.S. Presidential Election. Journal of Research in Personality, 77, 70–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2018.09.001

Bartels

L. M.

(2002). Beyond the running tally: Partisan bias in political perceptions. Political Behavior, 24(2), 117–150. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021226224601

Boyd

R. L.

Schwartz

H. A.

(2021). Natural language analysis and the psychology of verbal behavior: The past, present, and future states of the field. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 40, 21–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X20967028

Caprara

G. V.

Barbaranelli

Zimbardo

P. G.

(2002). When parsimony subdues distinctiveness: Simplified public perceptions of politicians’ personality. Political Psychology, 23(1), 77–95. https://doi.org/10.1111/0162-895X.00271

Caprara

G. V.

Vecchione

(2017). Personalizing politics and realizing democracy. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199982868.001.000.1

Caprara

G. V.

Vecchione

Barbaranelli

Fraley

R. C.

(2007). When likeness goes with liking: The case of political preference. Political Psychology, 28, 609–632.

Chandler

Rosenzweig

Moss

A. J.

Robinson

Litman

(2019). Online panels in social science research: Expanding sampling methods beyond Mechanical Turk. Behavioral Research Methods, 51, 2022–2038. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-019-01273-7

Chmielewski

Kucker

S. C.

(2020). An MTurk crisis? Shifts in data quality and the impact on study results. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 11(4), 464–473. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550619875149

Chung

C. K.

Pennebaker

J. W.

(2014). Using computerized text analysis to track social processes. In Holtgraves

T. M.

(Ed.), The Oxford handbook of language and social psychology (pp. 219–230). Oxford University. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199838639.013.037.

10.

Conway

L. G.

III. Conway

K. R.

Gorick

L. J.

Houck

S. C.

(2014). Automated integrative complexity. Political Psychology, 35, 603–624. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12021

11.

Conway

L. G.

III Conway

K. R.

Houck

S. C.

(2020). Validating automated integrative complexity: Natural language processing and the Donald Trump test. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 8, 504–524. https://doi.org/10.5964/jspp.v8i2.1307

12.

Conway

L. G.

III. Thoemmes

Allison

A. M.

Hands Towgood

Wagner

M. J.

Davey

Salcido

Stovall

A. N.

Dodds

D. P.

Bongard

Conway

K. R.

(2008). Two ways to be complex and why they matter: Implications for attitude strength and lying. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1029–1044.

13.

Crossley

S. A.

Kyle

McNamara

D. S.

(2017). Sentiment analysis and social cognition engine (SEANCE): An automatic tool for sentiment, social cognition, and social-order Analysis. Behavioral Research, 49, 803–821. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-016-0743-z

14.

Drutman

(2021). Theft perception: Examining the views of Americans who believe the 2020 election was stolen: A research report from the Democracy fund group. https://www.voterstudygroup.org/publication/theft-perception

15.

Federico

C. M.

Ekstrom

P. D.

(2018). The political self: How identity aligns preferences with epistemic needs. Psychological Science, 29, 901–913. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617748679

16.

Forscher

P. S.

Kteily

N. S.

(2020). A psychological profile of the alt-right. Perspectives in Psychological Science, 15, 90–116. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691619868208

17.

Frimer

J. A.

Brandt

M. J.

Melton

Motyl

(2018). Extremists on the left and right use angry, negative language. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 45, 1216–1231. https://doi.org/0.1177/0146167218809705

18.

Gosling

S. D.

Rentfrow

P. J.

Swann

W. B.

(2003). A very brief measure of the Big-Five personality domains. Journal of Research in Personality, 37, 504–528. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(03)00046-1

19.

Götz

Gosling

Rentfrow

(2021). Small effects: The indispensable foundation for a cumulative psychological science. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/hzrxf

20.

Houck

S. C.

Conway

L. G.

III Gornick

L. J.

(2014). The automated integrative complexity: Current challenges and future directions. Political Psychology, 35, 647–659. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12209

21.

Jordan

K. N.

Pennebaker

J. W.

Ehrig

(2018). The 2016 U.S. Presidential candidates and how people tweeted about them. SAGE Open, 8, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244018791218

22.

Jordan

K. N.

Sterling

Pennebaker

J. W.

Boyd

R. L.

(2018). Examining long-term trends in politics and culture through language of political leaders and cultural institutions. PNAS, 116, 3476–3481. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1811987116

23.

Jost

J. T.

(2017). Ideological asymmetries and the essence of political psychology. Political Psychology, 38, 167–208. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12407

24.

Jost

J. T.

Glaser

Kruglanski

A. W.

Sulloway

F. J.

(2013). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 339–375. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.3.339

25.

Jost

J. T.

Sterling

(2020). The language of politics: Ideological differences in congressional communication on social media and the floor of Congress. Social Influence, 15, 80–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/15534510.2020.1871403

26.

Kahan

D.M.

, (2016). The politically motivated reasoning paradigm, Part 1: What politically motivated reasoning Is and how to measure it. In Scott

R. A.

Kosslyn

S. M.

(Eds.), Emerging trends in the social and behavioral sciences. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118900772.etrds0417

27.

Kinsman

Frimer

J. A.

(2021). A psychological profile of extreme Trump supporters. In van Prooijen

(Ed.). Psychology of political polarization (pp. 53–76). Routledge. http://www.jeremyfrimer.com/uploads/2/1/2/7/21278832/kinsman___frimer__in_press_.pdf

28.

Lammers

Koch

Conway

Brandt

M. J.

(2016). Political domain appears simpler to the political extreme than to political moderates. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8, 612–622. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550616678456

29.

Lee

I. A.

Preacher

K. J.

(2013, September). Calculation for the test of the difference between two dependent correlations with one variable in common [Computer Software]. http://quantpsy.org

30.

Mohammad

(2021). Sentiment analysis: Automatically detecting valence, emotions, and other affectual states from text. In Meiselman

H. L.

(Ed.), Emotion measurement (2nd ed., pp. 1–54). Woodhead Publishing. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2005.11882.pdf

31.

Napier

J. L.

Jost

J. T.

(2008). Why are conservatives happier than liberals? Psychological Science, 19, 565–572. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02124.x

32.

Osborne

Satherley

Sibley

C. G.

(2021). Personality and ideology: A meta-analysis of the reliable, but non-causal, association between openness and conservatism. In Mintz

Terris

(Eds.), Oxford handbook on behavioral political science (pp. 1–43). Oxford University Press.

33.

Pape

R. A.

Ruby

(2021, February 2). The Capitol Hill rioters aren’t like other extremists. The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/02/the-capitol-rioters-arent-like-other-extremists/617895/

34.

Pennebaker

J. W.

Boyd

R. L.

Jordan

Blackburn

(2015). The development and psychometric properties of LIWC 2015. University of Texas at Austin.

35.

Pennycook

Rand

D. G.

(2021). Examining false beliefs about voter fraud in the wake of the 2020 Presidential Election. https://misinforeview.hks.harvard.edu/article/research-note-examining-false-beliefs-about-voter-fraud-in-the-wake-of-the-2020-presidential-election/

36.

Schlenker

B. R.

Chambers

J. R.

B. M.

(2012). Conservatives are happier than liberals, but why? Political ideology, personality, and life satisfaction. Journal of Research in Personality, 46, 127–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2011.12.009

37.

Sterling

Jost

J. T.

Bonneau

(2020). Political psycholinguistics: A comprehensive analysis of the language habits of liberal and conservative social media users. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 118(4), 805–834. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000275

38.

Sylwester

Purver

(2016). Twitter language use reflects psychological differences between Democrats and Republicans. PLOS ONE, 10, Article e0137422. https://doi.org/0.1371/journal.pone.0137422

39.

Van Prooijen

Krouwel

A. P. M

. (2019). Psychological features of extreme political ideologies. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 28, 159–163. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721418817755

40.

Wojcik

Hovasapian

Graham

Motyl

Ditto

P. H.

(2015). Conservatives report, but liberals display, greater happiness. Science, 347(6227), 1243–1246. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1260817(27)

41.

Woodard

S. R.

Chan

Conway

L. G.

III . (2021). In search of the cognitively complex person: Is there a meaningful trait component of cognitive complexity? Personality and Social Psychology Review, 25(2), 95–129. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868320972299

42.

Zmigrod

Goldenberg

(2021). Cognition and emotion in extreme political action: Individual differences and dynamic interactions. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 30, 218–227. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721421993820

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

0.03 MB