Disagreement or Badmouthing? The Role of Expressive Discourse in Politics

Hannon, Michael

doi:10.1093/oso/9780192893338.003.0017

Cited by 62 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…polarization: a range of empirical work suggests that when partisan participants report beliefs on contentious issues, they are often merely expressing what they take to be characteristic of their political allegiances (Hannon, 2020). This implies, optimistically, that there are fewer political disagreements than is often supposed (but also, pessimistically, that there are fewer political agreements).…”

Section: Populist Audiencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Populism and the Virtues of Argument

Aberdein

2022

Engaging Populism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This chapter argues that a virtue-theoretic account of argumentation can enhance our understanding of the phenomenon of populism and offer some lines of response. Virtue theories of argumentation emphasize the role of arguers in the conduct and evaluation of arguments, and lay particular stress on arguers' acquired dispositions of character, otherwise known as intellectual virtues and vices. Several factors to which the rise of populism has been attributed may be understood as arising from vices of argumentation, including arrogance, emulousness, and insouciance. Conversely, virtues of argument such as humility and good listening offer some prospect of a constructive response to populism.

show abstract

Section: Populist Audiencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Populism and the Virtues of Argument

Aberdein

2022

Engaging Populism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The two-way relationship between social identification and group-based emotions might be partially responsible for some forms of affective polarisation, where members of different social groups strongly dislike or even hate each other, irrespective of whether their disagreement are genuinely substantive (Hannon, 2021). 13 Group-based emotions such as anger are facilitated by the emotional tenor of SNSs and by deindividuation effects.…”

Section: Hostile Identities Snss and Angermentioning

confidence: 99%

Affective Polarisation and Emotional Distortions on Social Media

Tanesini

2022

Roy. Inst. Philos. Suppl.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper I argue that social networking sites (SNSs) are emotion technologies that promote a highly charged emotional environment where intrinsic emotion regulation is significantly weakened, and people's emotions are more strongly modulated by other people and by the technology itself. I show that these features of social media promote a simplistic emotional outlook which is an obstacle to the development and maintenance of virtue. In addition, I focus on the mechanisms that promote group-based anger and thus give rise to affective polarisation. In the final section, after a discussion of the positive value of some forms of anger, I argue that SNSs should not be designed to prohibit or suppress anger, but that its encouragement should also be avoided. I conclude with a suggestion about how this might be achieved.

show abstract

“…After all, if respondents claim to believe in something that is not true, such as the Pizzagate conspiracy or the Russian vote tampering conspiracy, how could a researcher demonstrate that their belief reports are insincere? Despite concerns about whether attempts to identify expressive responding in various studies have been successful, there is widespread agreement that a key study by Schaffner and Luks (2018) provides unusually compelling evidence for expressive responding (Bullock & Lenz, 2019;Hannon, 2021;Levy & Ross, 2021;Malka & Adelman, 2022). In this study, Schaffner and Luks (2018) took advantage of a controversy about the size of the crowd gathered at the National Mall for the presidential inauguration of Trump in 2017.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…This phenomena has also been termed "partisan cheerleading"(Bullock & Lenz, 2019) and "partisan badmouthing"(Hannon, 2021) in the context of politics.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Expressive responding in support of Donald Trump: An extended replication of Schaffner and Luks (2018)

Ross¹,

Levy²

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is considerable debate about how often survey respondents engage in “expressive responding”: professing to believe something that they do not sincerely believe to show support for their in-group. Nonetheless, there is widespread agreement that one particular study provides particularly compelling evidence for expressive responding. In the immediate aftermath of Donald Trump’s 2017 presidential inauguration rally there was considerable controversy about whether this inauguration crowd was the largest ever. At this time, a study was conducted which found that Donald Trump voters were more likely than Hillary Clinton voters or non-voters to indicate that an unlabeled photo of Donald Trump’s 2017 presidential inauguration rally showed more people than an unlabeled photo of Barack Obama’s 2009 inauguration rally, despite the latter photo clearly showing more people. However, this study was not pre-registered, meaning that replication is needed to establish the robustness of this important result. In the present study, we conducted an extended replication over two years after Donald Trump’s presidential inauguration rally. We found that despite this delay the original result replicated, albeit with a smaller magnitude. In addition, we extended the earlier study by testing several hypotheses about the characteristics of Republicans who selected the incorrect photo.

show abstract

Disagreement or Badmouthing? The Role of Expressive Discourse in Politics

Cited by 62 publications

References 29 publications

Populism and the Virtues of Argument

Populism and the Virtues of Argument

Affective Polarisation and Emotional Distortions on Social Media

Expressive responding in support of Donald Trump: An extended replication of Schaffner and Luks (2018)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About