The Role of Emotions in Political Communication
Week 1
Lecture 1
Emotion → discrete and temporary response to stimuli that can influence one’s cognitive
appraisals, psychophysiology, attitudes and behavior
Affect → construct that characterizes level/valence of a mood or emotion. A broader concept
than emotion or mood - can be either positive or negative
Mood → state of being that is more generalized and enduring and, like emotion, can influence
one’s processing of information
3 key elements of emotion:
1. Subjective experience → coming from our environment
2. Physiological response → e.g something that made us nervous
3. Behavioral response
We cannot really choose our emotions as - things like events in our environment are out of our
control → uncontrolled emotions
Political Communication → is an interactive process concerning the transmission of
information among politicians, the (news) media and the public
Power of news media → is the media mobilizing us? (political engagement)
Is media informing or manipulating → disinformation crisis
Public opinion/ political behavior
Cases - election campaigns, climate change. Immigration, incivility
What is the role of emotions in public debate - a problem or a solution? (depends on context)
Emotional media = emotional citizens → emotions used in media coverage (such as fear in the
headlines) can make people feel certain emotions
- Negativity drives online news consumption (rather than positive content) - keeps the
revenue going
- But maybe not all content is bad → e.g. Greta Thunberg (climate change) shared
message thru anger which inspired many people
- However, anger in media sometimes also means anger in citizens
1
,Why should we care?
- Emotions can be used to manipulate and mislead
- Emotions can lead to unintended or unexpected outcomes
- Are we susceptible to being influenced by the media and pol.com.?
- We can learn the ways media use emotions
Media Effects Research → trying to find a media effect
Media Effects Dimensions (media can influence our:)
a) Knowledge
b) Opinions - easier to change by media because it is more circumstantial
c) Attitudes - harder to change because it is more deeply rooted
d) Behavior - a crown effect of media effects research (but the effect is rare)
e) Perceptions, stereotypes, prejudice…
f) Emotions
History of Media Effects Research:
- Started with the idea that media is powerful → switched to the idea that we are the ones
who decided that “power” → and then back to the idea that media has power
Paradigm I: Begining in the early 20th century: Powerful media
- Observation of enormous popularity of media
- Principles of propaganda; media as manipulators → media has uniform effect -
Psychological and biological theories
Stimulus - Response Model:
S → R (media has uniform effect) - media inject certain thoughts in peoples heads
- Idea that was too simplistic
Pradigm 2 (a little bit less)
(Difference in how people respond in media effects - some people might not be as affected due to
existing attitudes and personality traits)
Black Box:
- Discovering individual differences in the black box
- Intervening factors: existing attitudes, opinions…
- No isolated individuals but connected members of small networks
S → Black Box → R
2
,Paradigm III - people are active media users → media has limited effects - its in hands of the
audience
Paradigm IV - return to moderately powerful effects → effects on society (and not an
individual)
- Media changing the society and not an individual person
- Shift to long-term effects of media - effects on social change
- Increasing Knowledge Gap → effect that everyone gains knowledge from media at
different rates - depending on their (cognitive) abilities
- Cultivation of fear thru media → media has a focus on scary things - cultivates the idea
that the world out there is scarier than it is → Fear (society-level theory)
Paradigm V - Return to powerful effects
- Media do have an effect but depends on certain elements
- Agenda-setting → media affect WHAT people think about; media select certain topics
and their salience leads to their importance perception
- Framing → media affect HOW we think of political issues; how the media presents a
certain topic; look who is affected and who is not (can depend on age, gender…) - Not
everyone is equally affected; who is affected? (are moderators)
- Underlying effect mechanisms such as EMOTIONS; how are people affected (are
mediators)
Agenda-setting (definition) by Cohen→ the press may not be successful much of the time in
telling people what to think but it is successful in telling people what to think about
Framing → refers to the observation that media can portray one and the same topic in very
different ways, emphasizing certain evaluations or only parts of an issue at the expense of
possible other (issues?)
- Deciding what to frame - by journalists or politicians → emphasizing certain parts of an
issue
- This decision to frame an issue leads to how the audience will think about that issue
What is the difference between A.S and Framing → Agenda-setting looks on story selection as a
determinant of public perceptions of issue importance while Framing focuses not on which
topics or issues are selected for coverage by the news media but instead on the particular ways
those issues are presented
Etman on Framing → to frame is to select some aspects of perceived reality and make them more
salient in a communication text, in such way as to promote a particular problem definition,
3
, casual interpretation, moral evaluation and/or treatment recommendation for the item, described
Idea of framing goes back (Lippmann) → world is too big, too complex and too distant for direct
acquaintance - frames simplify the world to audience (it is never just an isolated argument)
Frames → simpler models given to the audience to facilitate understanding - Inevitably only a
partial representation of reality
- Reporting requires decisions as to what aspects of reality to represent - Construction of and
issue for an audience, more than just an isolated argument
Other approaches to framing:
- Equivalency framing (psychology) → different presentations of identical decision-making
scenarios influence peoples choices and evaluations (e.g. 80% survive vs 20% die)
- Emphasis/issue framing (sociology) → people cannot understand the world fully but try to
make sense of it; to efficiently process information people apply interpretative schemas or frames
to classify information and to interpret it
Most common/generic news frames used by journalists (can be used in any topic):
1. Responsibility frame → gov.or individual responsibility; suggested problem solution, call for
action
2. Conflict frame → disagreement; two or more sides; blame/conflict; winners/losers
3. Human interest frame → human face; personal impact on lives; sympathy/pity;
personal/private aspects
4. Economic consequences frame → financial gains/losses; costs/expenses; future
consequences
5. Morality frame → moral message; social prescriptions how to behave
Issue-specific frames/ emphasis framing:
- Refugee crisis → human drama or terrorist threat
4
Week 1
Lecture 1
Emotion → discrete and temporary response to stimuli that can influence one’s cognitive
appraisals, psychophysiology, attitudes and behavior
Affect → construct that characterizes level/valence of a mood or emotion. A broader concept
than emotion or mood - can be either positive or negative
Mood → state of being that is more generalized and enduring and, like emotion, can influence
one’s processing of information
3 key elements of emotion:
1. Subjective experience → coming from our environment
2. Physiological response → e.g something that made us nervous
3. Behavioral response
We cannot really choose our emotions as - things like events in our environment are out of our
control → uncontrolled emotions
Political Communication → is an interactive process concerning the transmission of
information among politicians, the (news) media and the public
Power of news media → is the media mobilizing us? (political engagement)
Is media informing or manipulating → disinformation crisis
Public opinion/ political behavior
Cases - election campaigns, climate change. Immigration, incivility
What is the role of emotions in public debate - a problem or a solution? (depends on context)
Emotional media = emotional citizens → emotions used in media coverage (such as fear in the
headlines) can make people feel certain emotions
- Negativity drives online news consumption (rather than positive content) - keeps the
revenue going
- But maybe not all content is bad → e.g. Greta Thunberg (climate change) shared
message thru anger which inspired many people
- However, anger in media sometimes also means anger in citizens
1
,Why should we care?
- Emotions can be used to manipulate and mislead
- Emotions can lead to unintended or unexpected outcomes
- Are we susceptible to being influenced by the media and pol.com.?
- We can learn the ways media use emotions
Media Effects Research → trying to find a media effect
Media Effects Dimensions (media can influence our:)
a) Knowledge
b) Opinions - easier to change by media because it is more circumstantial
c) Attitudes - harder to change because it is more deeply rooted
d) Behavior - a crown effect of media effects research (but the effect is rare)
e) Perceptions, stereotypes, prejudice…
f) Emotions
History of Media Effects Research:
- Started with the idea that media is powerful → switched to the idea that we are the ones
who decided that “power” → and then back to the idea that media has power
Paradigm I: Begining in the early 20th century: Powerful media
- Observation of enormous popularity of media
- Principles of propaganda; media as manipulators → media has uniform effect -
Psychological and biological theories
Stimulus - Response Model:
S → R (media has uniform effect) - media inject certain thoughts in peoples heads
- Idea that was too simplistic
Pradigm 2 (a little bit less)
(Difference in how people respond in media effects - some people might not be as affected due to
existing attitudes and personality traits)
Black Box:
- Discovering individual differences in the black box
- Intervening factors: existing attitudes, opinions…
- No isolated individuals but connected members of small networks
S → Black Box → R
2
,Paradigm III - people are active media users → media has limited effects - its in hands of the
audience
Paradigm IV - return to moderately powerful effects → effects on society (and not an
individual)
- Media changing the society and not an individual person
- Shift to long-term effects of media - effects on social change
- Increasing Knowledge Gap → effect that everyone gains knowledge from media at
different rates - depending on their (cognitive) abilities
- Cultivation of fear thru media → media has a focus on scary things - cultivates the idea
that the world out there is scarier than it is → Fear (society-level theory)
Paradigm V - Return to powerful effects
- Media do have an effect but depends on certain elements
- Agenda-setting → media affect WHAT people think about; media select certain topics
and their salience leads to their importance perception
- Framing → media affect HOW we think of political issues; how the media presents a
certain topic; look who is affected and who is not (can depend on age, gender…) - Not
everyone is equally affected; who is affected? (are moderators)
- Underlying effect mechanisms such as EMOTIONS; how are people affected (are
mediators)
Agenda-setting (definition) by Cohen→ the press may not be successful much of the time in
telling people what to think but it is successful in telling people what to think about
Framing → refers to the observation that media can portray one and the same topic in very
different ways, emphasizing certain evaluations or only parts of an issue at the expense of
possible other (issues?)
- Deciding what to frame - by journalists or politicians → emphasizing certain parts of an
issue
- This decision to frame an issue leads to how the audience will think about that issue
What is the difference between A.S and Framing → Agenda-setting looks on story selection as a
determinant of public perceptions of issue importance while Framing focuses not on which
topics or issues are selected for coverage by the news media but instead on the particular ways
those issues are presented
Etman on Framing → to frame is to select some aspects of perceived reality and make them more
salient in a communication text, in such way as to promote a particular problem definition,
3
, casual interpretation, moral evaluation and/or treatment recommendation for the item, described
Idea of framing goes back (Lippmann) → world is too big, too complex and too distant for direct
acquaintance - frames simplify the world to audience (it is never just an isolated argument)
Frames → simpler models given to the audience to facilitate understanding - Inevitably only a
partial representation of reality
- Reporting requires decisions as to what aspects of reality to represent - Construction of and
issue for an audience, more than just an isolated argument
Other approaches to framing:
- Equivalency framing (psychology) → different presentations of identical decision-making
scenarios influence peoples choices and evaluations (e.g. 80% survive vs 20% die)
- Emphasis/issue framing (sociology) → people cannot understand the world fully but try to
make sense of it; to efficiently process information people apply interpretative schemas or frames
to classify information and to interpret it
Most common/generic news frames used by journalists (can be used in any topic):
1. Responsibility frame → gov.or individual responsibility; suggested problem solution, call for
action
2. Conflict frame → disagreement; two or more sides; blame/conflict; winners/losers
3. Human interest frame → human face; personal impact on lives; sympathy/pity;
personal/private aspects
4. Economic consequences frame → financial gains/losses; costs/expenses; future
consequences
5. Morality frame → moral message; social prescriptions how to behave
Issue-specific frames/ emphasis framing:
- Refugee crisis → human drama or terrorist threat
4
