COVID-19 and 9/11: The Effect of Emotion on Reflection and Partisanship During Crises.

• Date: 01 September 2021
• Author: Curry, Jacqueline C.
• Published date: 01 September 2021
• Author: Curry, Jacqueline C.

The study of political psychology, through its incorporation of established principles of the field of psychology into politics, has transformed the standard political literature which supposes a moral foundation for constituent behavior and action. (1) Decisions about which party, ideology, or candidate to adopt have, for years, been thought to have been chosen to align with the inherent beliefs of an individual. (2) However, as the field of political psychology expands, questions are being raised about what truly lies beneath the decisions people make within the political realm and whether or not they can change or be influenced by outside factors. (3)

One of the most important contributions to this growing field is the idea of reflection. This mental process builds on the cognitive division established by psychologist such as Daniel Kahneman in his investigative book, Thinking Fast and Slow. In this understanding of cognition, an individual's thought process is broken down into System 1--automatic intuitive reaction, and System 2--deeper analytical thought. (4) System 1 relies on socially and relationally ingrained intuitive opinions and preferences formed outside the confines of conscious thought, known as implicit biases. (5) Reflection, on the other hand, is the process in which an individual surpasses System 1 intuition and, instead, engages in the slower System 2 cognitive process of deliberation and reasoning. (6) How does this apply to the standard thought of morally driven political actions? Are constituents--when presented with new information--capable of reformulating their opinions based on this information? Is the public beholden to implicit bias, or can it overcome gut-reaction and socially ingrained thought through a cognitive process of understanding, analyzing, and incorporating data?

Kevin Arceneaux and Ryan J. Vander Wielen argue people can and make significant strides in the application of the concept of reflection to politics, as they show certain individual characteristics can enhance the likelihood of reflection during political decision-making. (7) They not only make important distinctions in who engages in reflection, but the level to which it occurs. Within System 2, Arceneaux & Vander Wielen break cognition into two further levels: algorithmic and reflective processes. (8) The former demonstrates intellectual capabilities akin to IQ, while the latter implies a desire to critically engage with information, regardless of natural intellect. (9) While a select few will engage at the highest level--reflection--most will default to implicit bias or utilize and manipulate new information to confirm previous belief, known as confirmation bias--a process they deem to be within System 1. (10) During this reflection, emotion functions as an underlying System 1--or subconscious--force which perpetuates reliance on implicit bias. (11) As such, in order to overcome implicit and confirmation bias, one must also look past reactionary emotions and engage with political situations in an unbiased manner. (12) This latter process of potential change of opinion due to reflection is of particular interest within the field of political psychology, as it proposes a way to break free from the steady increase in partisanship and extremism seen within American politics in recent years. (13)

However, what this approach fails to recognize is the intersectional role emotion plays in both System 1 and 2 processes, and the potential effect it can have on reflection. (14) In fact, the separation of emotion from cognitive thought which permeates both political and psychological literature may not hold as much weight as previously thought considering recent studies. New research into the role of emotion in cognition demonstrates that the former transcends system boundaries. Instead of operating as an indicator (or not) for further, independent analysis, research shows emotion works in tandem with cognitive thought to produce a holistic and intertwined assessment of situations. As such, emotion plays an integral role in subjective perception, not solely a reaction to an established fact. (15) Furthermore, these studies argue that the division of brain functions into affective (emotional driven) and cognitive implies a flawed understanding of the interconnected operations of emotion and cognitive processing. They do not operate within two distinct systems, but instead work together to formulate behavior and thought. (16)

Glimpses of this interconnectivity of the systems can be seen in Kahneman's research on memory and mood. He shows how memory, while being an active part of the intuitive System 1, can be transformed into a slower, more deliberate System 2 process when indexing for information. (17) In the same way one can rely on memory to make informed decisions, a person uses emotion as a means of deciding whether or not deeper analysis of a situation is necessary. Why, then, do we not apply the same transient premise to emotion, a similarly interwoven cognitive process? Studies have demonstrated how different moods affect how conclusions are drawn and what system is activated. When experiencing positive affect, a person more readily accepts intuition and, when faced with an objective question, is more likely to be correct in their intuitive answer. Conversely, negative affect causes a person to struggle to make accurate intuitive assumptions and necessitates the involvement of System 2. (18) This intentional degree of thinking allows for deeper assessment instigated by negative feelings such as doubt and threat which cause hesitancy in decision-making. (19) Accepting emotion as an equally complex and entangled factor in cognitive processing is a necessary step in understanding the psychology of decision-making.

Taking this new psychological understanding of the interaction between emotion and cognition and applying it to political situations is crucial for the development of a modern and accurate study of constituent thought and participation in politics. Through experimental data, this paper argues that emotion is a significant factor in how people approach and reflect on political situations. It aims to demonstrate how emotions, instead of only operating on a subconscious System 1 level driving implicit bias, can instigate or function in tandem with reflection within both subsections of System 2 reasoning and cognitive thought. Furthermore, it aims to reposition Arceneaux & Vander Wielen's System 1 level confirmation bias within System 2, as--despite reaffirming previous beliefs--it shows engagement with new information that changes how one views political situations and decision-making. Particularly, by performing research on constituent emotional response, identity affiliation, and approval of political leaders during times of national crises, this is an investigation into the role emotion--particularly anxiety and threat--plays in not only reflection but also partisanship. The hypothesis is that when confronted with a national crisis, people will experience increased feelings of anxiety and threat, leading to a departure from personal partisan identification in favor of a broader national identity. Reflection during times of crises will correlate with emotional response to leadership and the effects the conditions have on an individual's life.

Through statistical analysis of the survey data collected, this paper demonstrates support for the hypothesis that emotions play a significant role in reflection--specifically confirmation bias. The results show that emotions, particularly feelings of calm and safety, correlate with lower levels of reflection while anxiety and threat are associated with higher levels of reflection. These results support previous findings of the distinctive roles of positive and negative affect in cognitive thought. Additionally, the tests indicate an intersection between the effect of emotion and partisanship on reflection among the public. This paper exposes the importance of the effect emotions can have on constituency and elite behavior alike, shedding light on the importance of the underdeveloped area in political psychology and necessity for further research.

Research Design

The purpose of this research is to demonstrate the role of emotion in reflection and partisanship during times of national crisis. The research conducted focuses on two of the most emotionally, physically, and politically impactful crises the US has faced in the past two decades: COVID-19 and 9/11. (20) The decision to study times of crises in US history was based on the findings that reflection can be instigated in unprecedented scenarios, when the default System 1 provides no benefit and one must critically evaluate the situation, as he/she cannot rely on intuitive understanding and the resultant autonomous behavior. (21) The goal of conducting research during the onset of the COVID-19 outbreak is to survey the population in the midst of a time of heightened emotion due to the uncertainty as to what exactly causes the virus, who it most affects, and how to stop it. Given the lack of scientific understanding during the first couple months of the pandemic, the hypothesis is that this uncertainty will, in turn, cause heightened anxiety and a sense of threat. (22) Additionally, repeating the survey questions in reference to 9/11 serves to compare the event and emotions to another national crisis, but, instead, one that ignited fear and anxiety over a known threat and specific outlet and culprit for such emotions. (23) Moreover, the comparison and contrast of these two events has the potential to expose the role of memory in future emotionally-driven political evaluations. (24) Considering established evidence of memory's involvement in System 2 level analysis, this study investigates how associated emotions change or heighten that role. (25) Specifically of interest, is the phenomenon of...