In this study we explore the mediating role of emotions in the process of becoming a politically informed citizen. Contrary to previous studies, we expect that anger and anxiety will have much different effects on this process. We suspect the role of anxiety is somewhat unique even among negative emotions as mediator of the causal effect of political threats on information seeking and learning. In addition, we speculate that anxiety should improve the quality of information seeking, not just its quantity. In one experiment, we induce emotions directly and find that while anger, enthusiasm, and anxiety can lead people to claim they will pay attention to the campaign, anger actually depresses total information seeking. In a second experiment, we examine the impact of realistic political threats and find that exposure triggers several emotions but that only anxiety boosts information seeking and learning.

The rise of the Internet forces scholars to reevaluate the frequency and nature of political information seeking in the contemporary period. The functionality of the Internet makes passive exposure more difficult, and selective information seeking easier, than in the past. However, people may also use the Internet in a new and directed way-to arm themselves with information to express and defend their views either online or in the real world. The central question we explore in this paper is what explains balanced versus biased information seeking in the era of the Internet? We combine insights from Sears and Freedman (1967) with newer work on emotion to predict motivated selectivity: focusing specifically on the interaction between anxiety and information utility. Our central theoretical claim is that anxiety does not simply boost any information seeking; it triggers information seeking that is useful for addressing the problem at hand. Anxiety alone, therefore, does not guarantee a balanced information search. When counterattitudinal information is useful for some reason-for example, to defend their own opinions to others who may disagree-anxious citizens should seek it out. As a consequence, these subjects should learn more specific information about where each candidate stands on the issues. In an experiment we find support for these hypotheses. We conclude that while today's flexible Internet environment may permit selectivity, balanced seeking should still occur under a fairly common set of circumstances.

A steep decline in biologically based racial animus over the past four decades has not led to a softening of opposition to race-conscious policies such as affirmative action. One explanation for this is that a new racial belief system-referred to as symbolic racism or racial resentment-has replaced "old-fashioned racism." Another is that nonracial values such as ideology and a preference for small government now drive policy opinions. Our theory suggests that whereas disgust once accompanied ideas about "biologically inferior" groups, anger has become fused to conservative ideas about race in the contemporary period. As a result, anger now serves as the primary emotional trigger of whites' negative racial attitudes. We experimentally induce disgust, anger, or fear using an apolitical task and find anger is uniquely powerful at boosting opposition to racially redistributive policies among white racial conservatives. Nonracial attitudes such as ideology and small government preference are not activated by any of these negative emotions.A steep decline over the past 40 years in the belief that blacks are biologically different than, and inferior to, whites (Schuman et al. 1997) has not been accompanied by an increase in support for public policies intended to promote equal opportunity, such as affirmative action. A collection of "new racism" theories-including symbolic racism (Sears and Kinder 1971), racial resentment (Kinder and Sanders 1996), and modern racism (McConahay and Hough 1976; referred to hereafter as SR)-acknowledges that whites' "oldfashioned racism" (OFR) has genuinely receded over time in both prevalence and influence. In its place, a new racial belief system has emerged, rooted in an organic synthesis of antiblack affect and the sense that blacks violate cherished American values such as individualism (Kinder and Sanders 1996;Sears and Henry 2003).The politics-centered approach (Sniderman, Crosby, and Howell 2000), on the other hand, insists these new racism theories overestimate the role of racial animus. Instead, they argue, race-neutral values (RNV) regarding the proper size and role of government, political ideology, and individualism drive racial policy opinions. This

Why does party identification motivate citizens to participate in politics? From a theoretical standpoint, it is in a partisan's self-interest to free ride on the efforts of others. Yet, mere identification with a party is enough to motivate many people to overcome this structural hurdle. We theorize that, by virtue of aligning one's self with a party, individuals become more likely to react to their political environment with anger and enthusiasm rather than fear. Anger and enthusiasm are associated with approach and continuation of current behavior, while fear triggers behavior reconsideration. In short, party identification stimulates participation via anger and enthusiasm. On the other hand, fear produces thought but not much action. We find support for our model using data from the American National Election Studies (ANES) and an original laboratory experiment.

No abstract