State anxiety by itself does not change political attitudes: A threat of shock experiment

Abstract

Previous research suggests that state anxiety may sway political attitudes. However, previous experimental procedures induced anxiety using political contexts (e.g., social or economic threat). In a pre-registered laboratory experiment, we set out to examine if anxiety that is unrelated to political contexts can influence political attitudes. We induced anxiety with a threat of shock paradigm, void of any political connotation. All participants were instructed that they might receive an electric stimulus during specified threat periods and none during safety periods. Participants were randomly assigned to one of two conditions: Political attitudes (implicit and explicit) were assessed under safety in one condition and under threat in the other. Psychometric, as well as physiological data (skin conductance, heart rate), confirmed that anxiety was induced successfully. However, this emotional state did not alter political attitudes. In a Bayesian analytical approach, we confirmed the absence of an effect. Our results suggest that state anxiety by itself does not sway political attitudes. Previously observed effects that were attributed to anxiety may be conditional on a political context of threat.

Fear and Climate Change: How natural disasters and environmental fears shape American climate attitudes across political orientation

“…As opposed to previous predictions of conservative shifts in response to threat, modern evidence highlights that fear can motivate liberals to shift positions under a range of threatening circumstances (Brandt et al, 2021;Burke et al, 2013;Eadeh & Chang, 2019;Hatemi & McDermott, 2020). Conservatives and liberals address varying threats differently 2022), with liberals perceiving increased responsibility for climate threats (Eadeh & Chang, 2019). Fear and anger motivate political actors to seek threat-relevant information and encourage endorsements of left/right solutions that might resolve salient threats (Brandt & Bakker, 2022;Coan et al, 2021), which can supersede partisan differences (Jost, 2017;Redlawsk et al, 2010).…”

“…Previous literature on threat perception and politics has focused on innate dispositional differences between liberals and conservatives (Jost et al, 2017;Oxley et al, 2008), but recent research indicates that past findings are not replicable (Bakker et al, 2020;Müller et al, 2022;Ruisch et al, 2021), suffer from overgeneralization (Elad-Strenger et al, 2019), and are biased by restricted threat stimuli (Crawford, 2017;Eadeh & Chang, 2019;Hatemi & McDermott, 2020;Landau-Wells & Saxe, 2020). As opposed to previous predictions of conservative shifts in response to threat, modern evidence highlights that fear can motivate liberals to shift positions under a range of threatening circumstances (Brandt et al, 2021;Burke et al, 2013;Eadeh & Chang, 2019;Hatemi & McDermott, 2020).…”

“…Unfortunately, these models are pessimistic toward endeavors that seek to galvanize conservative acknowledgement of environmental threats -an undertaking of considerable importance to the success of climate initiatives. Additionally, a growing body of literature suggests that these paradigms may suffer from biased selections of threats that privilege conservative values, calling into question their foundational assumptions (Brandt & Bakker, 2022a;Brandt et al, 2021;Eadeh & Chang, 2019;Hatemi & McDermott, 2020;Landau-Wells & Saxe, 2020;Müller et al, 2022). Thus, there is a pressing need for research that can further elucidate the relationship between threat perception and left/right political orientation within the context of environmental fears (Brandt & Bakker, 2022b).…”