Search

Two experiments demonstrate that highly empathetic messages conveyed by a political candidate produce more favorable attitudes and increase the likelihood individuals will vote for the political candidate. Study 1 revealed this Empathetic Communication Effect is stronger among female political candidates than male. Compared to male candidates, female candidates are evaluated more positively when they engage in empathetic language but are more harshly penalized when they fail to display empathy. An analogous pattern emerged for candidate party in Study 2. Namely, the Empathetic Communication Effect is stronger among Democratic political candidates than Republican political candidates. Results also explore the impact of empathetic rhetoric on perceptions of candidates’ socio-emotionality and instrumentality.

According to the Earned Dogmatism Hypothesis, social norms entitle experts to be more dogmatic (closed-minded) than non-experts. Consequently, individuals who occupy the expert role are more closed-minded than non-experts. Ottati, Price, Wilson, and Sumaktoyo (2015) originally documented this effect in two sets of experiments, the “switching roles” and “success versus failure” experiments. Calin-Jageman (2018) obtained the earned dogmatism effect when replicating the “switching roles” experiments, but not when replicating the “success versus failure” experiments. Two hypotheses can account for this divergent replication pattern. The “restrictive condition” hypothesis postulates the earned dogmatism effect is limited to highly restrictive and unrealistic conditions (i.e., switching roles experiments that entail projective judgments in hypothetical situations), and fails to replicate under less restrictive conditions (e.g., conditions that evoke success versus failure, real world situations). The “optimal manipulation” hypothesis postulates the earned dogmatism effect is easily replicated in experiments that employ optimal manipulations of relative expertise, but less easily replicated in experiments that employ sub-optimal manipulations. According to this view, optimal expertise manipulations elicit the earned dogmatism effect, even under non-restrictive conditions. The “optimal manipulation” hypothesis is supported in three new experiments. In these experiments, the earned dogmatism effect is obtained using an optimal manipulation that is explicitly relative, an optimal manipulation that prompts participants to remember real-world situations, and an optimal manipulation of success versus failure. When predicting the earned dogmatism effect size across studies (Ottati, Price, Wilson, & Sumaktoyo, 2015; Calin-Jageman, 2018; three new experiments), the “optimal manipulation” hypothesis is also favored.

Classic and contemporary approaches to understanding political judgment implicitly acknowledged the role of chronic accessibility. Contemporary models also emphasize that situationally primed knowledge structures influence citizens’ political attitudes and opinions. Priming effects are evident when specific concepts are primed (e.g., an issue, the American Flag, terrorism), and when media frames activate narratives that prime specific aspects of a political event. Metaphoric media frames (e.g., the presidential campaign is a horserace) can prime or highlight specific aspects of a political event (e.g., candidate electability) and thereby influence the public's attitudes and opinion (e.g., attitudes toward a political candidate). The immediate context in which political judgments are reported also produces priming effects on political judgment.

Although open-mindedness is generally valued, people are not equally open-minded in all situations. Open-mindedness is viewed as socially desirable when individuals encounter viewpoints that are compatible with conventional social norms. However, open-mindedness is viewed in less desirable terms when individuals encounter viewpoints that undermine these norms. The perceived desirability of open-mindedness is also influenced by the individual’s personal attitudinal convictions. Individuals ‘inflate’ the normative appropriateness of open-mindedness when it serves to reinforce their convictions, but devalue the normative appropriateness of open-mindedness when it serves to contradict these convictions. Conversely, normative prohibition of closed-mindedness is exaggerated when a closed-minded orientation threatens the individual’s personal attitudinal convictions, but is minimized (or reversed) when a closed-minded orientation reinforces these convictions. Paradoxically, the perceived appropriateness ...

Although cultural values generally prescribe open-mindedness, open-minded cognition systematically varies across individuals and situations. According to the Earned Dogmatism Hypothesis , social norms dictate that experts are entitled to adopt a relatively dogmatic, closed-minded orientation. As a consequence, situations that engender self-perceptions of high expertise elicit a more closed-minded cognitive style. These predictions are confirmed in six experiments.

The present research conceptualizes open-minded cognition as a cognitive style that influences how individuals select and process information. An open-minded cognitive style is marked by willingness to consider a variety of intellectual perspectives, values, opinions, or beliefs—even those that contradict the individual’s opinion. An individual’s level of cognitive openness is expected to vary across domains (such as politics and religion). Four studies develop and validate a novel measure of open-minded cognition, as well as two domain-specific measures of religious and political open-minded cognition. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis (controlling for acquiescence bias) are used to develop the scales in Studies 1 to 3. Study 4 demonstrates that these scales possess convergent and discriminant validity. Study 5 demonstrates the scale’s unique predictive validity using the outcome of Empathic Concern (Davis, 1980). Study 6 demonstrates the scale’s unique predictive validity using the outcomes of warmth toward racial, religious, and sexual minorities.

We argue that personal religiosity and political religiosity are distinct attributes of a political candidate. Personal religiosity reflects a candidate's level of personal religious commitment and political religiosity reflects the candidate's policy regarding separating versus blending religion and politics. The paradoxical religiosity hypothesis predicts that, within a democracy, personal religiosity will increase voters' endorsement of a candidate whereas political religiosity will decrease voters' endorsement. We test this hypothesis comparatively in two experiments, one performed within a long-standing democracy containing predominantly Christian voters (the United States), and the other within a more recent democracy containing predominantly Muslim voters (Indonesia). We demonstrate the robustness of the paradoxical religiosity effect and its persistence across the two countries, suggesting that Muslim Indonesians are no less capable than Christian Americans in separating the sacred and the secular.

Previous research regarding the affective correlates of moral judgment has emphasized that this relation is rooted in the natural properties of discrete emotions, suggesting that specific emotions (e.g., disgust) increase moral condemnations for specific categories of moral violation (e.g. purity violations). In three experiments, we find that arousal increases the severity of moral condemnations, while emotion specificity effects remain absent. Results are compatible with constructivist approaches to emotion and the feelings as information account of social judgment.

The goals of Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) programs include improving safety during encounters between police and persons with mental illnesses, diverting persons with mental illnesses away from the criminal justice system, and increasing referral and access to mental health services. CIT is a systemic intervention, and as such, its implementation and effectiveness are influenced by existing practices and infrastructures. However, little research has considered the context in which CIT programs are implemented. In this paper, we present research on CIT in four Chicago police districts that vary in terms of two contextual factors hypothesized to influence the impact of CIT training on how calls involving persons with mental illnesses are resolved. Using data from 112 patrol officers in four Chicago police districts, we consider the impact of mental health services availability and CIT saturation (the percentage of district personnel that are CIT certified). Findings indicate that CIT training increased direction to mental health services primarily in districts with greater availability of mental health services. In districts with low service availability, higher CIT saturation increased direction to mental services. The opposite pattern emerged for contact only or informal call resolution. No effects were found for arrest as a call outcome.

Prescriptive beliefs pertaining to justice delineate the fair outcomes that an individual should receive. In contrast, descriptive beliefs pertaining to justice reflect expectations regarding the outcomes an individual actually will receive. This study examines the cultural determinants of prescriptive and descriptive beliefs pertaining to justice. It was assumed that prescriptive beliefs pertaining to justice are based on internalized cultural values, whereas descriptive beliefs pertaining to justice are more likely to reflect the recent conditions that actually characterize an individual's cultural environment. On this basis, it was predicted that (a) prescriptive and descriptive beliefs would possess both a generally perceived (or commonly shared) component and a culture-specific component, and (b) culture would impact prescriptive and descriptive beliefs differently. A cross-cultural comparison of justice beliefs among US, South African, and Chinese participants confirmed these predictions. Cautionary notes and implications are also discussed.

Voters typically evaluate an attractive candidate more favorably than an (otherwise equivalent) unattractive candidate. However, some voters "correct" for the biasing influence of physical appearance. This reduces, eliminates, or even reverses the physical attractiveness effect. Correction occurs when political experts evaluate a political candidate under nondistracting conditions. Under these "high cognitive capacity " conditions, voters primarily correct for physical unattractiveness. However, correction fails to occur when voters possess low levels of expertise or are distracted. Thus, in most circumstances, attractive candidates are evaluated more favorably than unattractive candidates. Two experiments provide support for this model of appearance-based candidate evaluation.

The Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) program was first developed to reduce violence in encounters between the police and people with mental illness as well as provide improved access to mental health services. Although there is overwhelming popular support for this intervention, scant empirical evidence of its effectiveness is available—particularly whether the program can reduce the use of force. This investigation seeks to fill this gap in the literature by exploring the factors that influence use of force in encounters involving people with mental illness and evaluating whether CIT can reduce the likelihood of its use.

The Crisis intervention team model (CIT) is possibly the most well known and widely adopted model to improve police response to persons with mental illness. A primary goal of CIT programs is to divert individuals with mental illness from the criminal justice system to mental health services. In this paper we examine the effectiveness of fielding CIT trained and supported officers for influencing call outcomes using data from patrol officers (n = 112) in four Chicago Police districts. Results from regression analysis indicate that CIT certified officers directed a greater proportion of persons with mental illness to mental health services than their Non-CIT certified peers. CIT did not have an immediate effect on arrest. Moderator analysis indicates that CIT had its biggest effect on increasing direction to services and decreasing "contact only" among officers who have a positive view of mental health services and who know a person with mental illness in their personal life. Additional moderators of the CIT effect on call outcomes include level of resistance and the presence of a weapon. Findings from this study have important implications for policy, practice and future research.

Participants were provided with a group impression prior to receiving behavioral information pertaining to a group member. The group impression conveyed a below average level of intelligence or an above average level of intelligence. In addition, the distribution of intelligence scores within the group was unimodal in one condition and bimodal in another condition. The behavioral information pertaining to the individual group member was predominantly intelligent or predominantly unintelligent, thereby affording the on-line formation of an intelligent or unintelligent personal impression regarding the group member. After receiving the behavioral information, participants recalled the behaviors and rated the group member along the intelligence dimension. Recall and judgment data revealed that the group impression functioned as the dominant expectancy that influenced processing of the behavioral information. Moreover, the effect of the group expectancy was substantially greater in the unimodal condition than in the bimodal condition. Presence of a group impression appears to reduce the tendency for participants to derive a personal impression on-line, and reduce the tendency for participants to rely on a derived personal expectancy when encoding behaviors performed by a group member. Potential moderators of this effect are discussed. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

A closer examination of current research efforts in political psychology re­ veals that the field cannot be characterized so easily in terms of disciplinary dominance. Instead, each parent discipline has influenced research in the other. Although political scientists, especially those working in the fields of public opinion and voting, may have been the more eager participants in this joint venture (in­ deed, most graduate training programs in political psychology are housed in depart­ ments of political science), the range of phenomena and activities studied by political scientists and the nonexperimental methods they use increasingly have migrated to psychology. In this sense, political psychology is a dialogue marked by genuine intellectual exchange (Iyengar & McGuire, 1992).

In the mid-1990s, Proposition 187 in California, directed primarily toward Mexican immigrants, tended to deprive “illegal” immigrants of welfare benefits, education, and all but emergency medical care. It also attempted to facilitate their deportation. By describing Mr. Carlos Suarez as a presumed illegal immigrant from Mexico, Study 1 showed that prejudice against Mexicans and concern about threat to the U.S. economy served as unique predictors of attitudes toward Proposition 187 and illegal immigrants. Study 2 demonstrated that respondents’ ethnicity, prejudice against Mexicans, economic concern, and commitment to legal obedience all served as unique predictors of attitudes toward illegal immigrants and Proposition 187.

Previous research on metaphor and persuasion has suggested that metaphorical language elicits an assimilation effect wherein positive metaphors elicit positive attitudes toward the communication topic and negative metaphors elicit negative evaluations. The authors of this article propose that metaphorical content can increase or decrease motivation to systematicall y scrutinize a persuasive communication depending on the extent to which it "resonates" with the listener's preferences and interests. Consistent with this model, 2 experiments demonstrate that a sports metaphor increases message-relevant elaboration and sensitivity to argument strength among individuals who enjoy sports. Conversely, the sports metaphor reduces message-relevant elaboration and sensitivity to argument strength among individuals who dislike sports. Findings are discussed in the context of related research that suggests metaphor can serve alternative functions in a persuasive communication task.

This study focused on the distinction between mythic and non-mythic framing of news stories pertaining to the Iraqi War. A content analysis was performed on 531 news articles appearing in The New York Times and Time Magazine from 2003 to 2007. Gallup polling data was used to construct measures of public opinion regarding the war (War Approval) and the Presidents handling of the war (Presidential Approval). In both news sources, non-mythical news coverage was more predominant than mythical coverage. Most importantly, the amount of mythical news coverage influenced popular opinion. Importantly, however, this mythical framing effect was moderated by media source and the nature of the popular opinion rating. Specifically, mythical news coverage in the New York Times significantly increased Presidential approval ratings. This mythical framing effect failed to emerge, however, when examining the effect of news coverage in Time Magazine and when predicting more general and impersonal ratings of War Approval. Results are discussed in the context of

Participants viewed a videotape of a person who expressed verbal statements accompanied by neutral, happy, or angry facial displays. These statements could be used to quickly stereotype the person (heuristic processing). Alternatively, these statements could be processed in a piecemeal manner for purposes of judging the person (systematic processing). Among low-motivation participants, neutral displays elicited systematic processing, whereas happy displays elicited heuristic processing. Angry displays elicited a processing style falling between these extremes. Highly motivated participants processed the verbal statements in a systematic manner regardless of the target's facial expression. These results correspond to findings reported in the mood literature, and the differences obtained for low- and high-motivation participants support a cognitive tuning account of the mediating process.

Research suggests that individuals do not respond to survey questions on the basis of a single, fixed set of psychological considerations. To the contrary, they respond on the basis of whatever material happens to come to mind at the moment of answering. Furthermore, the particular material that comes to mind often depends upon the nature of the question and the manner in which it is posed. This has important implications when attempting to assess the independence of beliefs and emotions as predictors of global attitude judgments. When addressing this question, it is important to consider the extent to which any given measurement procedure specifically targets ‘emotionally relevant beliefs’ in memory. Past research has failed to target this specific subset of beliefs. As a consequence, beliefs have failed to fully account for the relation between emotions and global attitude judgments. Completely different findings emerge when the researcher employs ‘decomposition’ and ‘emotionally cued recall’ to enable respondents to generate ‘emotionally relevant beliefs’. Under these conditions, beliefs fully account for the relation between emotions and global attitude judgments. However, this only occurs when one defines and operationalizes ‘emotionally relevant beliefs’ at the individual level. The theoretical and methodological implications of these results are discussed. © 1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

On the basis of Tajfel and Turner's social identity theory and Brewer's optimal distinctiveness model, salience of in-group membership and the nature of stereotypic expressions directed toward the recipient's in-group are proposed to determine perceptions of in-group homogeneity. The results of an experiment testing these hypotheses indicate that (a) cognitive priming of group membership or social identity produces an increase in perceived in-group homogeneity, (b) negative stereotypic threats that are inconsistent with the recipient's in-group autostereotype increase perceptions of in-group homogeneity, but (c) negative stereotypic expressions that are consistent with the recipient's in-group autostereotype engender a heterogeneous view of the in-group. Results are discussed in terms of a model that incorporates both the cognitive and motivational determinants of perceived in-group variation.

Research indicates that increased familiarity with a social category leads to greater category differentiation. Consequently, in-groups are perceived as more heterogeneous than out-groups and intergroup contact enhances perceived out-group heterogeneity. In examining Sino-American stereotypes, this study considers two additional determinants of perceived heterogeneity. These are (a) perceptual responsiveness to the target group's objective level of heterogeneity, and (b) adjusting perceptions of heterogeneity to be evaluatively consistent with attitudes toward the target group. The results obtained from Chinese and American subjects indicate that responsiveness to objective differences between the in-group and out-group can override the tendency to perceive greater heterogeneity in the in-group. Furthermore, evaluative consistency mechanisms play an important and unique role in determining perceived out-group heterogeneity.

In 2 experiments, implicit evaluation of novel and familiar concepts was assessed using a sequential priming procedure that enabled estimates of evaluative priming effects at low levels of detectability. In Experiment 1, the novel concepts referenced common names, and in Experiment 2 they referenced nonsense words. Whereas familiar concepts yielded priming effects at low levels of detectability in both experiments, novel concepts did not elicit any priming effect. Implicit evaluation of novel concepts has been documented in related research but under conditions that differ from those investigated here. The present results identify important limiting conditions associated with the implicit evaluation effect.

Past research suggests that beliefs and emotions operate as partially distinct determinants of political attitudes. In addition, while positive and negative beliefs about a political object are bipolar in structure, positive and negative emotions have been demonstrated to be relatively independent. In this past research, beliefs and emotions have been assessed with different measures. Yet current models of survey responding suggest that responses to survey items are often influenced by the manner in which the researcher poses the questions. As such, it is not clear whether the uniqueness of these belief and emotion measures reflects a bona fide difference between two underlying constructs, or merely an artifactual difference induced by differing methods of measurement. In this study, beliefs and emotions are shown to operate as partially unique predictors of candidate evaluation even when employing corresponding methods of measurement. The independence of positive and negative emotion, however, only arises when employing a dichotomous measure. When employing ordinal measures, positive and negative emotions contain a substantial component of bipolarity. The theoretical implications of these findings are discussed.

Three experiments investigated the role of stereotypic and nonstereotypic criteria in judgments of political candidates. The effects of physical attractiveness, political party, and stands on specific issues on both absolute and comparative judgments of political candidates were examined to evaluate three hypotheses about stereotype and attribute use. In the absence of other information, candidates' physical attractiveness (conveyed through photographs) had a substantial influence on subjects' global evaluations of them and inferences of both their personal qualities and their political ideology. When other information about the candidates' party membership and stands on specific issues was available, however, the candidates' attractiveness had no effect on the evaluations of them. When subjects made judgments of only one candidate, subjects relied exclusively on the candidate's voting record. When subjects were asked to make comparative judgments of two candidates, however, they based their judgments on each candidate's party membership and not on their respective voting records. Implications of these results for the processes that underlie political judgments and decisions are evaluated.

The large numbers of people with mental illness in jails and prisons has fueled policy concern in all domains of the justice system. This includes police practice, where initial decisions to involve persons in the justice system or divert them to mental health services are made. One approach to focus police response in these situations is the implementation of Crisis Intervention Teams (CIT). The CIT model is being implemented widely, with over 400 programs currently operating. While the limited evidence on CIT effectiveness is promising, research on CIT is limited in scope and conceptualization-much of it focusing on officer characteristics and training. In this paper we review the literature on CIT and present a conceptual model of police response to persons with mental illness that accounts for officer, organizational, mental health system and community level factors likely to influence implementation and effectiveness of CIT and other approaches. By moving our conceptualizations and research in this area to new levels of specificity, we may contribute more to effectiveness research on these interventions.

Prior research on political judgment has been polarized, with one group emphasizing normative models of political inference and the other emphasizing heuristic models of political inference. In accordance with recent findings in psychology, this article is rooted in the assumption that both normative and heuristic criteria simultaneously influence political judgments. Furthermore, differences in the relative extent to which these two processes serve to determine political judgments are hypothesized to depend on the nature of the judgment task. Two kinds of political judgments are considered: judgments reflecting beliefs about the candidates' stands on the issues and judgments reflecting global evaluations of the candidates. The reported results confirm that (1) voters rely on both normative- and heuristic-based considerations when forming these judgments, and (2) the relative extent to which these criteria influence these judgments depends on the complexity of the judgment task.

Political figures and events often elicit strong emotional responses in citizens. These responses have the power to impact judgments and information processing, as well as the types of information that individuals seek out. Recent examples of political events that have elicited strong emotional reactions are easily accessible. The fiasco in Florida during the presidential election of 2000 led many voters to experience anger at the outcome of the election and disgust at the process whereby it was decided. The terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001, led citizens to experience a collective sense of fear and anxiety, along with sadness for the loss of life and anger at Osama bin Laden for masterminding the attacks. Along with these negative emotions was a sense of enthusiastic patriotism in the United States. Positive affective reactions, however, tend to be more general than negative reactions. That is, while positive reactions may be experienced as general positivity, negative feelings are typically more differentiated and may be experienced, for example, as fear, anger, sadness, disgust, or guilt (e.g., Averill 1980; Ellsworth and Smith 1988).

With the movement of persons with mental illness out of hospitals and into the community, the frequency of contact between police officers and such persons, in crisis or otherwise, has increased significantly. How police respond in these situations has important consequences for the subject, police officers, and the community. Officers (n = 554) from police departments in a major metropolitan area participated in a vignette experiment that examined how information that a subject has a mental illness influences the way police officers respond in several types of situations. Results indicate that officers are less likely to take action based on information provided by victims and witnesses with mental illness. No differences were found in response to suspects with or without a mental illness. The effects of officer characteristics and perceptions of the subject on responses to the vignettes were also examined. Findings suggest several directions for training and future research.

A significant portion of police work involves contact with persons who have mental illness. This study examined how knowledge that a person has a mental illness influences police officers' perceptions, attitudes, and responses.A total of 382 police officers who were taking a variety of in-service training courses were randomly assigned one of eight hypothetical vignettes describing a person in need of assistance, a victim, a witness, or a suspect who either was labeled as having schizophrenia or for whom no information about mental was provided. These officers completed measures that evaluated their perceptions and attitudes about the person described in the vignette.A 4 x 2 multivariate analysis of variance (vignette role by label) examining main and interaction effects on all subscales of the Attribution Questionnaire (AQ) indicated significant main effects for schizophrenia label, vignette role, and the interaction between the two. Subsequent univariate analyses of variance indicated significant main effects for role on all seven subscales of the AQ and for label on all but the anger and credibility subscales. Significant role-by-label interaction effects were found for the responsibility, pity, and credibility subscales.Police officers viewed persons with schizophrenia as being less responsible for their situation, more worthy of help, and more dangerous than persons for whom no mental illness information was provided.

Background: This paper seeks to answer two fundamental questions: What is the basis of the current form of mental illness stigma? and Why do western cultures stereotype people with mental illness as dangerous, incompetent and blameful, rather than something else?Material and discussion: We argue that a motivational model called system-justification offers several benefits for answering these questions. System-justification portrays stigma as a way of making sense of economic and political differences between the majority and stigmatized subgroups. We contrast system-justification with two cognitive models of stigma that seem to have strong support from naïve psychology: mental illness stigma results as the normal perception of a group of people who are dangerous and/or blameworthy and there is a kernel of truth to the stigmatizing attitudes about people with mental illness. Although research supporting the latter two models is mixed, there are significant limitations to the models, as well as concerns that normal perception and kernel of truth might actually promote stigma.Conclusions: As an alternative, system-justification combines three paradigms that suggest its worthiness for future research: 1) a review of historical and economic forces that influence social phenomena; 2) the need of humankind to understand these forces and organize them into a unitary framework; and 3) the cognitive mechanisms that are essential for this comprehension. Implications of this model for stigma change are discussed.

California's Proposition 187, directed primarily toward Mexican immigrants, deprives illegal immigrants of many benefits associated with U.S. citizenship and facilitates their deportation. The authors hypothesized that the respondents' opinions on this proposition would be determined by in-group-out-group bias (i.e., the tendency to evaluate the ethnic out-group more negatively than the ethnic in-group). In accord with that hypothesis, variations in respondent ethnicity (Studies 1 and 2) and in immigrant ethnicity (Study 3) were systematically related to the respondents' opinion on that issue. Moreover, the effect of in-group-out-group bias was independent of perceived reasoned economic and legal considerations that underlay the respondents' opinion.

There was a time when politicians conveyed their message to the American public predominantly through newspaper and radio communication. This is no longer the case today. Most American citizens encounter political events through their television sets, and television news plays a central role in bringing political events to the attention of the American electorate (Ansolabeher, Behr, & Iyengar, 1993). The increasing importance of television has influenced many facets of the political communication process. For one thing, politicians must learn to project a positive image if they are to succeed in gaining (and maintaining) their political office. As noted by Masters, Frey, & Bente (1991), television emphasizes the visible and especially nonverbal cues of political leadership. Given these considerations, it is not surprising that President Reagan sought the expertise of Tuesday Team Incorporated—a prominent Madison Avenue group that specializes in creating attractive televised images.

It seems self-evident that political figures arouse passion and emotion in the electorate. Vivid examples can be found throughout all of political history. In 1864, Harper’s Weekly described Abraham Lincoln as a “monster”, a characterization that is clearly emotionally evocative (Jamieson, 1992). John F. Kennedy, the “Camelot” president, evoked feelings of tremendous pride and patriotism in his eloquent speeches (e.g., “Ask not what your country can do for you…”). Bill Clinton’s recent sexual escapades elicited disgust among many citizens, and his subsequent lies about the affair aroused considerable anger. Moreover, political candidates notoriously surround themselves with contextual stimuli (e.g., the American flag, balloons, music) that are designed to elicit positive emotional reactions in the electorate ([Jamieson, 1992]).

Part I: The Psychological Determinants of Candidate Evaluation. 1. The Psychological Determinants of Candidate Evaluation and Voting Preference V.C. Ottati, et al. 2. Gender Stereotyping and Candidate Evaluation: Good News and Bad News for Women Politicians L. Huddy, T. Capelos. 3. The Emotional Voter: Effects of Episodic Affective Reactions on Candidate Evaluation L.M. Isbell, V.C. Ottati. 4. Visual Cues and the Candidate Evaluation Process V.C. Ottati, M. Deiger. 5. Political Eloquence D.C. O'Connell, S. Kowal. Part II: Political Psychology and Public Policy. 6. The Psychological Determinants of Public Opinion L. Skitka, E. Mullen. 7. The Role of Social Ideologies in Legitimizing Political Attitudes and Public Policy F. Pratto, C. Cathey. 8. The Role of Science and Advocacy Regarding a Chronic Health Condition L.A. Jason, et al. Part III: Collective Political Action: Intra and Intergroup Perspectives. 9. Minority Influence and Political Interest Groups C.M. Smith, P.J. Diven. 10. The Psychology of Collective Political Protest D. Abrams, G.R. de Moura. 11. Procedural and Agenda Effects on Political Decisions by Small Groups T. Kameda, et al.

As the information age marches forward, citizens are presented with an increasingly large and complex array of political information. Political information is available for consumption in newspapers, radio, television, magazines, the World Wide Web, and in conversations with our peers. How do citizens digest this information for purposes of arriving at a voting preference? What is the nature and type of information that voters rely upon when forming a voting preference? These two questions are the primary focus of this chapter. The first involves the cognitive processes that underlie the acquisition of new information about a political candidate, and the use of this information, in the context of previously acquired knowledge, to make a voting decision. The second involves the substantive content of the information that enters into these processes (e.g., party, issue positions, trait assessments).

James H. Kuklinski, Department of Political Science and Institute of Government and Public Affairs, University of Illinois Ellen Riggle, Department of Political Science, University of Kentucky Victor Ottati, Department of Political Science, State University of New York at Stony Brook Norbert Schwarz, ZUMA, Mannheim, Federal Republic of Germany Robert S. Wyer, Jr., Department of Psychology, University of Illinois

Two experiments investigated the determinants of agreement with propositions that advocated social privileges for either people in general or specific social groups. Liking for the group to which a group-specific proposition referred had a contrast effect on agreement with a related general proposition that was considered immediately after it, but had a positive influence on agreement with a general proposition that did not occur until several items later. The latter effect was eliminated by instructing Ss to base their judgments on the consequences of the policies described in the propositions. Instructions to base judgments on affective reactions to the propositions produced contrast effects of group-specific propositions on judgments of general ones regardless of whether these items were separated or together in the questionnaire.

Three studies explored the role perceptions of samples of Hispanic Navy recruits. Three different methods were used: (1) role differentials, in which a role, such as son-mother; and behaviors, such as "tells secrets to," were presented to subjects who estimated the frequency of the behavior on a ten-point scale ranging from never to always; (2) behavior differentials, in which stimuli, such as father, and behaviors that the subjects themselves engage in were presented to subjects who indicated whether they would engage in such behaviors, and (3) attribute ratings in which the subjects were presented with a stimulus person and were asked to indicate the probability of certain attributes being characteristic of the stimulus (e.g., fathers are tough). There was some convergence across methods. The total pattern of results across studies suggested that subjects from the U.S. general population experience a push out of the family, a pull toward the family, and a pull toward work roles, the total sum of these forces favoring work roles. Hispanics, on the other hand, experience essentially no push out of the family, a strong pull toward the family, and perceive work roles with considerable ambivalence.