Logo

    The Four Biggest Myths About Political Persuasion

    enAugust 16, 2024
    What is the key to effective persuasion according to the text?
    How do political differences arise according to the research?
    Why might moderation appeal to undecided voters?
    What is the significance of swing voters in elections?
    How does persuasion in politics differ from problem-solving games?

    Podcast Summary

    • Moral foundations of persuasionUnderstanding and appealing to the moral foundations of the person you're trying to persuade is more effective than assuming your own moral convictions are universal. Adapt arguments to their moral grounds for greater persuasive power.

      Effective persuasion involves understanding and appealing to the moral foundations of the person you're trying to persuade, rather than assuming your own moral convictions are universal. According to research, political differences are often fueled by different moral stories and concerns, and attempts to persuade people based on our own moral codes are less effective than making arguments on their moral grounds. For instance, when trying to persuade conservatives on the topic of immigration, appealing to their values of the American dream, family needs, and work shortages might be more persuasive than focusing on progressive values of justice and equality. However, recent research suggests that political persuasion is more common than assumed, and people do change their minds based on new facts and frameworks. Therefore, it's essential to recognize that while people's moral foundations may be fixed, they are still open to learning and considering new information.

    • New information about lesser-known candidatesFocusing on introducing new information about lesser-known candidates is more persuasive than attacking opponents, especially during election season

      Attacking an opponent is not the most effective strategy for political persuasion, especially when the opponent is well-known like Donald Trump. Instead, focusing on introducing new information about lesser-known candidates, like Kamala Harris, can be more persuasive. According to political scientist David Brockman, people are more likely to be persuaded by messages about things they know less about. As people become more familiar with a candidate or issue, the persuasive power of campaigns decreases. Therefore, it's crucial for campaigns to effectively communicate new information to voters, especially as the election approaches.

    • Persuading undecided voters in a general electionFocusing on a candidate's moderation in a general election involves more than avoiding extreme positions or unpopular issues. Candidates should aim to build a broad coalition of supporters by agreeing with voters on as many issues as possible to appeal to undecided voters and insulate themselves from attacks.

      When trying to persuade undecided voters in a general election like the 2024 presidential race, focusing on a candidate's moderation may be effective. However, this approach should not be limited to avoiding extreme positions or avoiding taking stands on unpopular issues. Instead, it's essential to consider how voters think about issues and their overall perception of a candidate. Swing voters, who are less ideological than decided voters, are more likely to focus on how many issues they agree with a candidate on rather than their ideological label. Therefore, taking a centrist position on one issue may not necessarily signal moderation on other issues to swing voters. Instead, candidates should aim to build a broad coalition of supporters by agreeing with voters on as many issues as possible. This approach can help insulate them from attacks and increase their appeal to undecided voters.

    • Effectiveness of political labelsPolitical labels may not be effective in persuading persuadable voters due to their lack of political knowledge and ideological inclination, and specific messages might be more successful.

      People's perspectives on politics and candidates are shaped by various binaries, such as left versus right, moderate versus radical, and weird versus normal. However, the effectiveness of these labels in influencing the opinions of persuadable voters is questionable. These voters may not be well-versed in politics or ideologically inclined, making it challenging for them to connect the dots between political labels and specific policies or messages. Moreover, political commentators, who are often the ones providing advice, might not be the best judges of what resonates with these voters due to their ideological leanings and deeper engagement with politics. Instead, specific and less vacuous messages may be more effective in persuading these voters.

    • Fox News viewersExposing Fox News viewers to CNN for a month led to some changes in their knowledge and views without causing a backlash, demonstrating that people's opinions can shift.

      While many people may not be deeply engaged with politics and may not have well-informed opinions on key issues, it is not entirely true that people never change their minds or that attempts to persuade them are futile. A study conducted during the 2020 election found that exposing conservative Fox News viewers to CNN for a month led to some meaningful changes in their knowledge and views, without causing a backlash. However, these effects are typically small, and in close elections, even small shifts in opinion can make a difference. Ultimately, effective persuasion requires understanding the complexities of human behavior and the nuances of communication, rather than relying on simplistic tricks or extreme views.

    • News biasExposure to biased news sources, like Fox News, can alter one's perception and understanding of political issues, but these effects are not permanent.

      Exposure to biased news sources, even unintentionally, can significantly impact one's perception and understanding of political issues. The study suggests that Fox News, in particular, can persuade viewers to form new theories about politics through subtle learning, even for those who don't identify as regular viewers. The research indicates that viewers exposed to Fox News in the study learned new facts and formed opinions that differed from those who only watched CNN. However, these effects were not permanent, as viewers eventually returned to their original news sources. Overall, the study highlights the power of news media in shaping public opinion and the importance of being aware of potential biases.

    • Political Persuasion Long-termThe impact of persuasive messages can decay rapidly over time, requiring ongoing reinforcement and research to understand the complex and evolving nature of political persuasion

      While people may change their minds on certain issues, the impact of persuasive messages can decay rapidly over time. This means that political campaigns and commentators need to focus not only on persuading voters in the short term but also on reinforcing their messages over the long term. Contrary to the belief that there is a fixed set of known truths about how people change their minds, the science of political persuasion is complex and constantly evolving. While there may be some consistent findings, the effectiveness of persuasive messages can depend on various contextual factors, such as the specific issue, the audience, and the messenger. Therefore, it's essential to continue researching and refining our understanding of political persuasion rather than relying on a set of fixed rules or commandments.

    • Political persuasionPolitical persuasion is an infinite game that requires continuous strategy adaptation as it's influenced by various factors and responses from opposing parties.

      While voter turnout can be approached as a solvable game, political persuasion is an infinite game that will never be fully solved. The strategies for persuading voters are constantly evolving and dynamic, as they are influenced by various factors and the responses of opposing parties. The analogy of asking economists about stock picks or football strategies illustrates this point. Persuasion is a zero-sum game in politics, and both parties are always adjusting their strategies based on the previous election. Therefore, it's essential to adopt a meta strategy of continuously figuring out what is persuasive in any given moment. A recent study conducted by Swable, in collaboration with several researchers, including Luke Hewitt, Ben Tappen, and Alex Copic, provides insights into testing ad effectiveness and adapting strategies accordingly.

    • Political ad effectiveness and contextPolitical ads' effectiveness depends on context and audience values, requiring campaigns to gather data and adapt strategies accordingly, rather than relying on outdated methods or moral foundations theory as a one-size-fits-all solution.

      The effectiveness of political ads and messaging in persuasion is not consistent and depends on the context of the time. Research on Democratic campaign ads from 2018 and 2020 showed that ads focusing on issues were effective in 2018 but less so in 2020. Therefore, it's crucial for politicians and campaigns to gather data and adapt to changing contexts, rather than relying on outdated strategies. Moral foundations theory, which suggests that people are not persuaded but rather have their existing beliefs validated, may not be a one-size-fits-all solution for political persuasion. Instead, understanding the specific context and the audience's values is key to effective messaging. The frontier of political campaigns lies in building systems that can adapt to the ever-changing electorate and voter needs.

    • Moral foundations theory limitationsMoral foundations theory is valuable, but not a definitive solution for understanding moral reasoning and social issues; historical analogies and other approaches can also provide insight.

      While moral foundations theory is a valuable framework for understanding moral reasoning, it's not a one-size-fits-all solution. Social sciences, unlike physics, don't have definitive laws that apply to every person and context. Moral foundations theory can be useful in explaining certain phenomena, but it's not the only way to persuade or understand people. Historical analogies can also provide insight, but they shouldn't be slavishly followed. The key is to find a healthy middle ground and use a variety of tools to understand complex social issues. In politics, for example, a campaign might use moral foundations theory to reach some voters, but also employ other strategies to appeal to others. Ultimately, no single theory or approach can explain everything, but a nuanced and thoughtful application of multiple perspectives can lead to a deeper understanding of the world.

    Recent Episodes from Plain English with Derek Thompson

    How AI Could Help Us Discover Miracle Drugs

    How AI Could Help Us Discover Miracle Drugs
    We may be on the cusp of a revolution in medicine, thanks to tools like AlphaFold, the technology for Google DeepMind, which helps scientists predict and see the shapes of thousands of proteins. How does AlphaFold work, what difference is it actually making in science, and what kinds of mysteries could it unlock? Today’s guest is Pushmeet Kohli. He is the head of AI for science at DeepMind. We talk about proteins, why they matter, why they’re challenging, how AlphaFold could accelerate and expand the hunt for miracle drugs, and what tools like AlphaFold tell us about the mystery of the cosmos and our efforts to understand it. If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com. Host: Derek Thompson Guest: Pushmeet Kohli Producer: Devon Baroldi Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

    The Psychology of Conspiracy Theories

    The Psychology of Conspiracy Theories
    Are conspiracy theories more popular than ever? Are Americans more conspiratorial than ever? Are conservatives more conspiratorial than liberals? Joseph Uscinski is a political scientist at the University of Miami and one of the nation's preeminent experts on the psychology of conspiratorial thinking and the history of conspiracy theories in America. He has some counterintuitive and surprising answers to these questions. Today, he and Derek discuss—and debate—the psychology and politics of modern conspiratorial thinking. If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com. Host: Derek Thompson Guest: Joseph Uscinski Producer: Devon Baroldi Links Uscinski's research page: https://people.miami.edu/profile/60b5fb062f4f266afb6739ec21657c74 "The psychological and political correlates of conspiracy theory beliefs" https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-25617-0 "Fake news on Twitter during the 2016 U.S. presidential election" https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30679368/ "Right and left, partisanship predicts (asymmetric) vulnerability to misinformation" https://misinforeview.hks.harvard.edu/article/right-and-left-partisanship-predicts-asymmetric-vulnerability-to-misinformation/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

    "Exercise May Be the Single Most Potent Medical Intervention Ever Known"

    "Exercise May Be the Single Most Potent Medical Intervention Ever Known"
    Exercise is a conundrum. On the one hand, physical activity is clearly one of the best interventions for preventing physical disease and mental suffering. On the other hand, scientists don't really understand how it works inside the body or what exactly running, jumping, lifting, and squatting do to our tissues and organs. That's finally changing. Euan Ashley, a professor of genomics and cardiovascular medicine and the chair of the Stanford Department of Medicine, is a member of a new research consortium that studies rats and humans to understand the molecular changes induced by exercise. Today we talk about the earliest findings from this new consortium, how exercise might have disparate effects in men versus women, why nature’s most effective cardiovascular intervention also seems to be nature’s most effective mental health intervention, as well as whether it will one day be possible to identify the molecular basis of exercise precisely enough to develop exercise pills that give us the benefits of working out without the sweat. If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com. Host: Derek Thompson Guest: Euan Ashley Producer: Devon Baroldi Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

    Democrats Are Euphoric. But This Election Is Much Closer Than They Think.

    Democrats Are Euphoric. But This Election Is Much Closer Than They Think.
    Derek offers a short but sweet review of the Democratic National Convention, the science of post-convention bounces, and the reality of the 2024 polling: It's still a toss-up. If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com. Host: Derek Thompson Producer: Devon Baroldi Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

    The Four Biggest Myths About Political Persuasion

    The Four Biggest Myths About Political Persuasion
    Today's episode is about how we change our minds—and what political science tells us about the best ways to change the minds of voters. Our guest is David Broockman, a political scientist at the University of California Berkeley, and the coauthor, with Josh Kalla, of a new essay in Slow Boring on Kamala Harris, Donald Trump, and the most persuasive arguments and messages to decide this election. Today, David and I talk about the four biggest myths of political persuasion—and in the process, David will attempt to do something that I’m not entirely sure is possible: He’ll try to change my mind about how persuasion works. If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com. Host: Derek Thompson Guest: David Broockman Producer: Devon Baroldi Links: "What's Better Than Calling Donald Trump 'Weird'?" https://www.slowboring.com/p/whats-better-than-calling-trump-weird "Consuming cross-cutting media causes learning and moderates attitudes: A field experiment with Fox News viewers" https://osf.io/preprints/osf/jrw26 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

    How to Be Happy and the Science of Cognitive Time Travel

    How to Be Happy and the Science of Cognitive Time Travel
    Laurie Santos is a superstar in the crowded field of happiness research. She is a cognitive scientist at Yale University whose course on the psychology of happiness was the most popular class in the school's history. She is the host of the immensely popular ‘Happiness Lab’ podcast. Today, she and Derek talk about her favorite lessons from modern happiness research, lessons on striving and anxiety from existential philosophy, our relationship to time, the science of cognitive time travel, temporal mind tricks to reduce anxiety like "psychological distancing," and more. If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com. Host: Derek Thompson Guest: Dr. Laurie Santos Producer: Devon Baroldi Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

    Market Meltdown FAQ: Recession Fears, Global Stock Wipeout, and the Case for Calm

    Market Meltdown FAQ: Recession Fears, Global Stock Wipeout, and the Case for Calm
    In a special emergency-ish episode, Bloomberg's Conor Sen joins the show to discuss a buffet of economic and financial fears, including a disappointing jobs report, a meltdown in global stocks, the "carry trade" heard round the world, the smartest criticisms of (and smartest defense of) the Federal Reserve's decision not to raise interest rates, and more. If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com. Host: Derek Thompson Guest: Conor Sen Producer: Devon Baroldi Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

    Why Are Robocalls So Hard to Stop? (Plus: Kamala and the Gender Wars.)

    Why Are Robocalls So Hard to Stop? (Plus: Kamala and the Gender Wars.)
    Derek offers his thoughts on Kamala Harris, the new 2024 reality, and gender polarization in the "boys vs. girls" election. Then we talk about the spam apocalypse. The average American receives one spam call or text every single day, adding up to tens of billions of robocalls and texts per year. Derek welcomes Joshua Bercu, the executive director of Industry Traceback Group, to talk about the history and technology behind robocalls and texts, why it’s been so hard to hold robocallers accountable, how spammers do that thing where they make a call look like it’s coming from a local friend, how we've managed to crush certain kinds of robocalls, and what it would take to finally win the war on spam. If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com. Host: Derek Thompson Guest: Joshua Bercu Producer: Devon Baroldi Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

    Why Are Conservatives Happier Than Progressives?

    Why Are Conservatives Happier Than Progressives?
    It is a general rule of thumb that richer societies are happier societies. This is true across countries, as GDP and life satisfaction are highly correlated. And it is true across time. Countries get happier as they get richer. But there is a caveat to this general principle. Which is that the United States is not nearly as contented as its gross national income would predict. In fact, the U.S. is, as we’ve covered on this show, in a bit of a gloom rut. It has now been nearly two decades since a majority of Americans have told pollsters at NBC that they’re satisfied with the way things are going. This hope drought has no precedent in modern polling. NBC itself reported that “We have never before seen this level of sustained pessimism in the 30-year-plus history of the poll.” Polls show that faith in government, business, and other institutions is in free fall—especially among conservatives. But they also show that conservatives are generally happy with their life and in their relationships. If conservatives have happiness without trust, American progressives seem to have trust without happiness. In a recent paper called “The Politics of Depression,” published by the journal Social Science & Medicine–Mental Health, the epidemiologist Catherine Gimbrone and several coauthors showed that young progressives are significantly more depressed than conservatives, have been for years, and the gap is growing over time. Other studies, including the General Social Survey, show the same. Why are young progressives so sad? Today’s guest is Greg Lukianoff, the president and CEO of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) and coauthor of ‘The Coddling of the American Mind.’ He has written intelligently, critically, and emotionally about happiness, depression, politics, and progressivism. If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com. Host: Derek Thompson Guest: Greg Lukianoff Producer: Devon Baroldi Links: "People in Richer Countries Tend to Be Happier" https://ourworldindata.org/happiness-and-life-satisfaction "The Politics of Depression" by Catherine Gimbrone et al https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666560321000438 "How to Understand the Well-Being Gap Between Liberals and Conservatives" by Musa al-Gharbi https://americanaffairsjournal.org/2023/03/how-to-understand-the-well-being-gap-between-liberals-and-conservatives/ "The Coddling of the American Mind" The Atlantic essay by Jonathan Haidt and Greg Lukianoff https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind/399356/ ‘The Coddling of the American Mind’ [book] https://www.amazon.com/Coddling-American-Mind-Intentions-Generation/dp/0735224897 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

    Harsh Truths About 2024 and the Future of the U.S. Economy

    Harsh Truths About 2024 and the Future of the U.S. Economy
    On today's episode: the state of American politics and the future of America's economy. Derek discusses a media myth in the aftermath of the failed Trump assassination attempt and reviews three basic truths about Joe Biden's doomed presidential bid. Then, Chicago Fed president Austan Goolsbee joins the show to answer Derek's blunt question, "Are you going to cut rates next month?" Plus, they discuss the Federal Reserve, how it works, how he sees the economy, whether high rates are constraining housing production, and whether Trump's signature economic policy idea—high tariffs in an age of global inflation—would help the U.S. economy. (TLDR: No.) If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com. Host: Derek Thompson Guest: Austan Goolsbee Producer: Devon Baroldi Links: “Stop Pretending You Know How This Will End,” Derek Thompson, The Atlantic “Hit or Miss? The Effect of Assassinations on Institutions and War,” by Benjamin Jones and Benjamin Olken Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices