A new study published in the British Psychology Journal suggests that people are more likely to support populist politicians when they find them entertaining. In four studies involving participants in the United States, the researchers found that the extent to which people considered a leader as exciting, engaging or attracting attention predicted their support – more strongly for populist leaders like Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders than for non -populist characters like Joe Biden or Mitt Romney. The results offer new information on how emotional experiences and personal style shape political preferences.
The researchers aimed to better understand why populist leaders obtained substantial support in many countries. Previous research had largely focused on negative emotions, such as fear or anger, as a populist support engines. However, researchers proposed that positive feelings – in particular the enjoyment of an entertaining political style – could also play an important role. They suggested that populist leaders, depicting society as a fight between “corrupt elites” and “noble people”, create emotionally charged stories which are more captivating and emotionally intense than conventional political messages.
“Common explanations of populist support are mainly focused on factors that” distance “people from traditional politics, such as feelings of anger, anxiety and insecurity,” said study author Jan-Willem Van Proijen, associate professor in Vu Vu Amsterdam, principal researcher at the NSCR, and professor of radiation, excellent experts at Maastrich University.
“But I believe that this is only part of the story. Often, a vote for a populist candidate is more than a simple vote of protest: many voters are really enthusiastic about populist leaders. What makes populist leaders so attractive? This research sought to discover to what extent is considered to be entertaining questions in populist support.”
To investigate this idea, the researchers conducted four pre-registered studies with 1,802 participants based in the United States. Study 1 compared the voters of Trump and Biden, asking participants to assess how much they found the leader they have supported and how much they continued to support this leader. Study 2A and 2B study moved attention to comparisons within political parties. In study 2A, republican voters evaluated Donald Trump and Mitt Romney, while in study 2B, democratic voters evaluated Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden. Finally, study 3 used an experimental conception where participants were randomly assigned to read a populist or non -populist discourse written by an unknown fictitious politician. This approach allowed researchers to isolate the effect of a populist style without the influence of previous knowledge on political personalities of the real world.
In the four studies, entertainment assessments regularly predicted greater political support, and this effect was stronger for populist personalities. In study 1, participants who found Trump more entertaining were more likely to support him, compared to the voters of Biden, whose support depended less on entertainment assessments. The 2A study found the same model among the Republicans: Trump’s support was more closely linked to entertainment than that of Romney. In study 2B, the diagram held for Sanders compared to Biden, although the difference is smaller.
Study 3 provided the most direct evidence. Participants who read populist discourse found more entertainment and reported stronger support for the fictitious politician. Those in the non -populist condition always showed a link between entertainment and support, but the relationship was lower. Above all, participants exposed to populist discourse also reported more intense emotions, which suggests that emotional intensity – not just positive or negative feelings – plays a role in the attraction of populist rhetoric.
“In the first studies, we compared the existing and well -known politicians, both between parties (Trump against Biden) but also within the parties (for example, Trump against Romney). They are all well -known personalities on which everyone has an opinion,” Van Prooijen told Psypost.
“What surprised me, however, is that we found these effects even when the participants were exposed to a populist or non-populist discourse generated by AI-AI. Thus, even for an unknown political figure, people are more likely to base their support on how they found only one speech when the discourse was populist (blame the problems of society on the corruption of the elites who try to overcome the population) than non -popular people).
Another key conclusion was that general populist attitudes – such as distrust of the elites and strong identification with “ordinary people” – support populist leaders through the path of entertainment. In other words, people who already had populist opinions tended to find more entertaining populist leaders, which made them more likely to support them. This mediation effect did not appear for non -populist leaders.
“All politicians benefit from a certain measure from being considered entertaining by the public, but populist politicians benefit more than non -populist politicians,” said Van Proijen. “This suggests that populism is a form of” popcorn policy “: supporters of populist candidates are more strongly inclined to base their choice on superficial features which could be considered entertaining and which could distract the real content of the proposed policies.”
Research has been pre -registered, which means that researchers have publicly documented their study conceptions, hypotheses and analysis plans before collecting data. Pre -registration is important because it helps to prevent selective reports and increases the credibility of the results by clearly indicating that the analyzes have been planned in advance rather than chosen after seeing the results.
But, as with all research, there are still some limits. Most participants were based in the United States and the politicians tested were mainly American. Populist movements vary from country to country, sometimes mixing left and right ideas in a way that does not integrate perfectly into an American political framework. Future research could explore whether the same effects focused on entertainment is present in other political systems, such as in Europe, Latin America or Asia.
“So far, we have only examined these effects in the United States, but populist movements differ enormously in various regions of the world,” noted Van Proijen. “In addition, we have not largely distinguished the right -wing populist leaders.
“This research line is part of a wider research objective to better understand the emotional foundations of populism. Researchers have often stressed that emotions are important, but then focus only on negative emotions such as anger and fear. Positive emotions are also important; valence of emotions in itself. All these questions are important to examine more in future research. »»
The researchers stressed that their work highlights the importance of considering positive and emotionally intense experiences when studying political preferences. Populist leaders often present simple solutions to complex problems, attack the figures of the establishment and describe themselves as people’s champions – all the ingredients that make their messages more convincing and emotionally resonant.
“One of the things that have struck me for years is that populist leaders around the world often tend to be somewhat eccentric and catchy individuals who arouse the established order looking for conflicts,” said Van Prooijen. “This research suggests that these characteristics, which some citizens could find entertaining, have an electoral function.”
The study, “Popcorn Politics: entertainment assessments predict support to populist leaders“, Was written by Jan-Willem van Proijen, Julia Kipperman, Yuxuan Li, Yifan Mo and Paul Nachtwey.