Psychophysiology and politics

Research on psychophysiology concerns the combination of mental and bodily processes. Questions about the relationships between mind, body, and politics have long been integral to political philosophy and the history of political thought, with classical scholars such as Plato and Aristotle and Western state-of-nature theorists such as Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau contemplating and questioning the role of physiology in political behavior (Arnhart, Reference Arnhart1981; Masters, Reference Masters1989). While research on the influence of psychophysiology on politics within contemporary political science dates back more than 40 years (Keating et al., Reference Keating, Mazur, Segall, Cysneiros, Kilbride, Leahy and Wirsing1981; Lodge et al., Reference Lodge, Cross, Tursky and Tanenhaus1975; Madsen, Reference Madsen1986; McHugo et al., Reference McHugo, Lanzetta, Sullivan, Masters and Englis1985; Peterson & Somit, Reference Peterson, Somit and Wiegele1982; Wahlke, Reference Wahlke1979; Wahlke & Lodge, Reference Wahlke and Lodge1972; Watts & Sumi, Reference Watts and Sumi1979), the popularity of this topic declined in the late 1980s, a casualty of the popularity of behavioralist and rational paradigms (Peterson & Somit, Reference Peterson, Somit, Peterson and Somit2017). However, within the past two decades, research on psychophysiology and politics has garnered sustained attention as an area of empirical research. This increased interest in psychophysiology is, in part, attributable to new and more available technologies able to measure physiological phenomena such as valence and source, neurochemical hormones, and genetics.

Also motivating this increased attention are recent changes in the political landscapes of many Western democracies which are driven by polarization (Mason, Reference Mason2018) and the activation of citizens’ baser instincts. To better understand these phenomena, political scientists are drawing on a broad interdisciplinary literature on cognition, psychology, and physiology. In exploring the possible applications of this literature, political science, along with other disciplines, such as communications and behavioral economics, is gradually adopting a more consilient understanding of motivation and political behavior while also addressing limitations within its predominant theoretical frameworks (Bakker, Schumacher, Gothreau, & Arceneaux, Reference Bakker, Schumacher, Gothreau and Arceneaux2020; Bakker, Schumacher, & Homan, Reference Bakker, Schumacher and Homan2020; Bakker et al., Reference Bakker, Schumacher and Rooduijn2021; Balzer & Jacobs, Reference Balzer and Jacobs2011; Osmundsen et al., Reference Osmundsen, Hendry, Laustsen, Smith and Petersen2019; Oxley et al., Reference Oxley, Smith, Alford, Hibbing, Miller, Scalora and Hibbing2008; Petersen et al., Reference Petersen, Giessing and Nielsen2015; Smith & Hibbing, Reference Smith, Hibbing, Hatemi and McDermott2011; Smith et al., Reference Smith, Oxley, Hibbing, Alford and Hibbing2011).

Today, this growing body of research by or in collaboration with political scientists demonstrates the importance of incorporating a psychophysiology perspective, showing connections between processes such as genetics (Hatemi et al., Reference Hatemi, Medland, Klemmensen, Oskarsson, Littvay, Dawes and Martin2014; Ksiazkiewicz & Friesen, Reference Ksiazkiewicz and Friesen2019), neurophysiology (Schreiber et al., Reference Schreiber, Fonzo, Simmons, Dawes, Flagan, Fowler and Paulus2013; Xia et al., Reference Xia, Stolle, Gidengil and Fellows2015), and cognition (Oxley et al., Reference Oxley, Smith, Alford, Hibbing, Miller, Scalora and Hibbing2008; Soroka, Fournier, & Nir, Reference Soroka, Fournier and Nir2019). A key finding of this research is that attitudinal and ideological development depends on a complex interaction between social, cognitive, and physiological factors (Hibbing et al., Reference Hibbing, Smith and Alford2014). Despite the success of these pathbreaking studies, political scientists are largely unfamiliar with the various theoretical and methodological approaches used in psychophysiological research (but see Settle et al., Reference Settle, Hibbing, Anspach, Carlson, Coe, Hernandez and Arceneaux2020). As a result, resources available to political scientists have yet to be fully integrated into traditional areas of research such as public opinion and political psychology: how and why do individuals develop different political attitudes.

In recognition of this knowledge gap, an objective of this special issue is to showcase a variety of methods and approaches that are applicable to political science questions. We are pleased to present the following articles whose topics range from sensory perception (taste) and political preference to cognitive dissonance and physiological arousal. We believe that these studies make important contributions to establishing a foundation for research in political science.

Structure

Replicating the same funding model as the previous Special Issue of Politics and the Life Sciences on Disgust and Political Attitudes, in 2019, we invited researchers from across the social sciences to submit research proposals in a competitive call for US$1,500 in research support from the APLS. Each of these proposals was blinded by the managing editor and then ranked by the guest editors on the metrics of theoretical importance, quality of the proposed methodology, and feasibility. In total, the authors of eight proposals were invited to submit comprehensive research PAPs, which were then sent for a full double-blind peer review.Footnote ¹ Proposals that passed through the peer-review process were, in turn, granted an in-principle acceptance and provided with the research funds by APLS after the preregistered study was deposited on the Open Science Foundation (OSF) website. An in-principle acceptance to Politics and the Life Sciences was conditional on the authors executing their research plan as outlined in their peer-reviewed proposal. This, however, did not preclude exploratory analysis of the data collected in a separate section of the registered report; it just required that the PAP agreed to, and funded, be followed in as rigorous a manner as originally proposed.

After data collection and analysis were completed, finalized manuscripts were sent for a second peer review by the original reviewers to verify that the research was executed according to the original peer-reviewed PAP. In cases of changes from the original research design, authors were required to report and justify the deviations, with reviewers deciding whether these deviations were valid.Footnote ² For example, several of the proposals featured in-lab experimental designs that needed to be revised to online data collection because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Of the eight original proposals short-listed by the special issue editors, two projects were postponed by the COVID-19 pandemic, one of which will be published in a future issue of Politics and the Life Sciences. Two other projects did not pass peer review.

The articles

This special issue includes four articles, outlined in Table 1, which includes information about their OSF registration. We summarize the findings of each here and discuss a perspective piece on open science research practices for political science (Rubenson, Reference Rubenson2021).

Table 1.

Special Issue on Psychophysiology, Cognition, and Political Differences, articles, authors, and open science access.

Political taste: Exploring how perception of bitter substances may reveal risk tolerance and political preferences. Risk is an important part of social and political life. In this study, Friesen, Ksiazkiewicz, and Gothreau (Reference Friesen, Ksiazkiewicz and Gothreau2021) apply evolutionary psychological insights regarding risk-taking behavior to the study of political decision-making. They examine whether variation in the tolerance for, and sensory perception of, risk (in the form of bitter-tasting substances) predicts various forms of political engagement. Consistent with the appreciation that “politics is risky business,” they find that self-reported bitter taste preference is positively associated with higher levels of risk tolerance. While political scientists recognize the importance of risk to the political arena, the authors advance research on the role that risk-taking behavior plays in politics through the inclusion of novel tools (PROP tasting strips) to measure risk preference and detection. In doing so, the authors encourage political scientists to think more carefully about the motivational psychology associated with risk-taking and how this may impact political participation and engagement.

Does music affect citizens’ evaluations of candidates? This article examines the effect of music on candidate evaluation. Using an experimental manipulation involving five campaign ads used in national election campaigns in the United States, United Kingdom, and New Zealand, Heisbourg and Feitosa (Reference Heisbourg and Feitosa2021) examine whether the ads’ original music influences participants’ assessments of political candidates on four traits: competence, honesty, compassion, and leadership. The authors find marginal evidence that music affects the evaluation of leaders on three of the four traits. The article outlines important next steps for research on the effects of emotional induction on political communication and behavior.

Measuring attitudes as a complex system: Structured thinking and support for the Canadian carbon tax. In their article, Mansell et al. (Reference Mansell, Mock, Rhea, Tecza and Peireder2021) develop and test a novel network-based approach to measuring individual thought and affect toward a given political issue. The authors utilize a visual mapping tool called cognitive-affective mapping, which allows participants to represent visually as a network the concepts and emotions they associate with a given domain. Using a latent analysis, the authors demonstrate that the structural properties of these networks, including valence, coherence, and centrality, are significantly related to participants’ views about the carbon tax. This new methodology for the study of cognition has the potential to contribute to research on attitude formation and change, ideological constraint, motivated reasoning, and political polarization.

The psychophysiological correlates of cognitive dissonance. Using a combination of physiological measures, Ploger et al. (Reference Ploger, Dunaway, Fournier and Soroka2021) test core principles of cognitive dissonance theory as they apply to the study of political communication. Drawing on the theories of Leon Festinger, the authors test whether experimentally induced cognitive dissonance produces a state of physiological arousal which is followed by a state of dissonance reduction. Ploger and colleagues discuss how understanding whether and how individuals regulate their emotion in response to “uncomfortable” psychological states such as dissonance is likely highly significant for future research in political communications, especially regarding the reception, processing, and impact of political messages. Theoretically, this research has important implications for future examinations of motivated reasoning and affective polarization. More pragmatically, this project provides an example of how exploration of pre-existing data can use the registered report process that is the “gold standard” of open scientific inquiry.

Tie my hands loosely: Pre-analysis plans in political science. In this perspective piece, former Evidence in Governance and Politics (EGAP) editor Daniel Rubenson discusses the trend toward open science research practices in political science. To share his insights and experience, Rubenson (Reference Rubenson2021) engages with both the positive effects of open science practices, such as increases in the publication of null results, but also its challenges, including the need for better developed norms and practices for the writing and evaluation of pre-analysis plans. For authors interested in incorporating PAPs into their research, Rubenson outlines some simple features that he believes should be the core of any registered design. For editors and reviewers evaluating PAPs, Rubenson outlines what he focuses on as an editor when assessing a design. He also offers advice about what is most important to consider when comparing a PAP with a submitted article undergoing peer review. By summarizing and addressing key issues with the open science movement, this perspective piece makes an important contribution to the development of research methods in political science.