Verified by 
Key points
- Political messaging creates in-groups and out-groups.
- Messages create a desire to reject the "other" political party by evoking feelings of disgust.
- Combining disgust with anger or fear of the threat posed by the "other" party can drive votes.
The political climate in the United States and around the world has become increasingly divisive. Voters in multiple countries express disgust, fear, and anger toward people in the “other” party and their candidates. The greater ability to selectively choose the news we’re exposed to seems to contribute to this divisiveness — we can create echo chambers for our own views and not hear other perspectives. But this increasing intellectual isolation cannot explain the strong emotions people express about politics — as when people unfriend, reject, and attack those with different political views.
The Power of “Other”
Decades of studies have shown how powerful the creation of in-groups and out-groups can be for human psychology. The in-group is “people like us." We give a lot of advantages to our in-group members, including more support and benefits, as well as attribute positive characteristics like intelligence and kindness to them. The out-group is “not us.” We punish out-group members and attribute negative characteristics to them, like laziness and lack of moral character. In-groups and out-groups are amazingly easy to create. Assigning boys to a particular camp group or assigning people to groups allegedly based on their artistic preferences is enough to create in- and out-groups. How strongly we affiliate with our in-group and reject other groups makes sense given human history, where people’s ability to survive depended on their ability to form groups to hunt and defend against danger.
Today’s political context has divided into strong in-groups and out-groups, so much so that people now consider their political affiliation to be central to their identity — a core part of who they are as a person. Why is this happening and why does it seem to be getting worse?
One explanation is that political messages have included more and more content that creates emotional responses, particularly about the “other” party — the out-group. The availability of social media has likely enhanced the power of these types of messages. Messages can be created and easily distributed that are highly visual and compelling, pulling the emotional strings of potential voters. The impact of these messages is not the information that is included — it is about the emotion being evoked in potential voters.
How Messages Play on Emotion
The emotion of disgust is particularly powerful in creating in-groups and out-groups and motivates rejection of the out-group. Disgust is associated with the area of the brain called the insula and the rapid rejection of poisoned or spoiled food. With development, disgust becomes tied to moral constructs and creates an urge to reject people or groups who are viewed as immoral or contaminated. Several recent studies have shown that, in the United States, Democrats and Republicans feel disgust toward the “other” party and see them as gross. Attack messages that portray the “other” party as animalistic, immoral, and lacking in character are likely to evoke disgust.
Disgust motivates people to view the political out-group negatively and to reject them, but disgust by itself can also lead people to be uninterested in voting. Effective messages would also need to evoke emotions that increase the likelihood that people will vote. Fear and anger are particularly likely to drive people to action. Excitement can also motivate people to vote, but negative emotions are usually more powerful and effective.
Fear is created when people perceive threats to important goals. Messages that frame the political out-group as fundamentally different from “us” in ways that threaten our way of life and our fundamental values can generate feelings of fear. Anger towards groups is created when people view the group as preventing them as individuals or groups from achieving important goals. Messages that frame the political out-group as an obstacle are a way to generate anger; for example, that the “other” group’s policies hurt our ability to succeed or restrict our freedoms. When people are afraid or angry, they are particularly likely to vote and to take action.
More Rational Voting
These types of messages probably sound familiar and you’ve probably seen hundreds of these already this year. Political messages can be targeted to evoke emotional responses, create division, and sway election outcomes.
How do you guard against the effects of political messages that create emotion and division? Several recent studies suggest that intentionally taking a rational, non-emotional view of the messages or the political situation can reduce their impact. Intentionally distancing ourselves from the emotions caused by messages and taking a more “objective” perspective might turn down the political temperature a few notches.
