Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Using Political Psychology to Understand Populism, Intellectual Virtues, and Democratic Backsliding

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Engaging Populism

  • 193 Accesses

Abstract

Political scientists have argued that populism is an ideology that can occur on both the left and the right, whereby people begin to see politics as a battle between the people and a powerful elite that fails to represent the people’s interest and are attracted to political candidates who vow to fight corruption. In this chapter, I examine how research in political psychology can help to explain the motivations underlying citizens’ attraction to populist ideologies and candidates. I argue that the same cognitive processes driving people toward populism are those that undermine the intellectual virtues, which in turn decreases support for democratic norms and can lead to democratic backsliding. In particular, I examine the role of emotions like threat, uncertainty, and anger in driving both support for populism and decreasing tendencies to support open-minded discussion and debate. I also consider how misinformation and attraction to conspiracy theories plays a role in the link between populism and antidemocratic tendencies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bar-Haim, Y., D. Lamy, L. Pergamin, M.J. Bakermans-Kranenburg, and IJzendoorn M. H. van. 2007. Threat-related attentional bias in anxious and nonanxious individuals: A meta-analytic study. Psychological Bulletin 133 (1): 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Battaly, Heather. 2008. Virtue epistemology. Philosophy Compass 3 (4): 639–663.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bergmann, Eirikur. 2018. Conspiracy and populism: The politics of misinformation. Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bergmann, Eirikur, and Michael Butter. 2020. Conspiracy theory and populism. In Routledge handbook of conspiracy theories, ed. M. Butter and P. Knight. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, Sonia, John Duncan, Matthew Brett, and Andrew D. Lawrence. 2004. Prefrontal cortical function and anxiety: Controlling attention to threat-related stimuli. Nature Neuroscience 7: 184–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brandt, M.J., C. Reyna, J.R. Chambers, J.T. Crawford, and G. Wetherell. 2014. The ideological-conflict hypothesis: Intolerance among both liberals and conservatives. Current Directions in Psychological Science 23 (1): 27–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brandt, M.J., J.R. Chambers, J.T. Crawford, G. Wetherell, and C. Reyna. 2015. Bounded openness: The effect of openness to experience on intolerance is moderated by target group conventionality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 109 (3): 549–568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cacioppo, John T., and Gary G. Berntson. 1994. Relationship between attitudes and evaluative space: A critical review, with emphasis on the separability of positive and negative substrates. Psychological Bulletin 115: 401–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castanho Silva, Bruno, Federico Vegetti, and Levente Littvay. 2017. The elite is up to something: Exploring the relation between populism and belief in conspiracy theories. Swiss Political Science Review 23 (4): 423–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Democracy Index. 2019. A year of democratic setbacks and popular protest. 2019. The Economist Intelligence Unit, 2019. Accessed March 2020. http://www.eiu.com/topic/democracy-index.

  • Dillon, Robin S. 2012. Critical character theory: Toward a feminist perspective on ‘vice’ (and ‘virtue’). In Out from the shadows, ed. Sharon Crasnow and Anita Superson. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas, Karen M., Joseph E. Uscinski, Robbie M. Sutton, Aleksandra Cichocka, Turkay Nefes, Chee Siang Ang, and Farzin Deravi. 2019. Understanding conspiracy theories. Advances in Political Psychology 40 (S1): 3–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, John S., and Jeffrey Berejikian. 1993. Reconstructive democratic theory. American Political Science Review 87 (1): 48–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freedom in the World 2019. 2019. Freedom House, 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galston, William A. 2018. The populist challenge to liberal democracy. Journal of Democracy 29 (2): 5–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Global democracy in retreat. 2020. The Economist Intelligence Unit. January 21, 2020. Accessed March 2020. https://www.eiu.com/n/global-democracy-in-retreat.

  • Greenberg, Jeff, Tom Pyszczynski, and Sheldon Solomon. 1986. The causes and consequences of the need for self-esteem: A terror management theory. In Public self and private self, ed. Roy F. Baumeister. New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haas, Ingrid J. 2016. The impact of uncertainty, threat, and political identity on support for political compromise. Basic and Applied Social Psychology 38 (3): 137–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haas, Ingrid J., and William A. Cunningham. 2014. The uncertainty paradox: Perceived threat moderates the effect of uncertainty on political tolerance. Political Psychology 35 (2): 291–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hameleers, Michael, Linda Bos, Nayla Fawzi, Carsten Reinemann, Ioannis Andreadis, Nicoleta Corbu, Christian Schemer, Anne Schulz, Tamir Shaefer, and Toril Aalberg. 2018. Start spreading the news: A comparative experiment on the effects of populist communication on political engagement in sixteen European countries. The International Journal of Press/Politics 23 (4): 517–538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins, Kirk A. 2010. Who mobilizes? Participatory democracy in Chavez’s Bolivarian revolution. Latin American Politics and Society 52 (3): 31–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins, Kirk A., and Cristobal Rovira Kaltwasser. 2019. The ideational approach. In The ideational approach to populism: Concept, theory, and analysis, ed. Kirk A. Hawkins, R. Carlin, Levente Littvay, and C. Rovira Kaltwasser. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins, Kirk A., and Levente Littvay. 2019. Contemporary US populism in comparative perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins, Kirk A., R. Agilar, B. Castanho Silva, E. K. Jenne, B. Kocijan, and C. Rovira Kaltwasser. 2019. Measuring populist discourse: The global populism database. EPSA Annual Conference, Belfast, UK. Accessed March 2020. https://populism.byu.edu/App_Data/Publications/Global%20Populism%20Database%20Paper.pdf.

  • Hofstadter, Richard. 1964. The paranoid style in American politics. Harper’s Magazine, November.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooghe, Marc, and Ruth Dassonneville. 2018. Explaining the Trump vote: The effect of racist resentment and anti-immigrant sentiments. PS: Political Science & Politics 51 (03): 528–534.

    Google Scholar 

  • Houle, Christian, and Paul D. Kenny. 2016. The political and economic consequences of populist rule in Latin America. Government and Opposition 53 (2): 256–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jessen, Nathan. 2019. Populism and conspiracy: A historical synthesis of American countersubversive narratives. American Journal of Economics and Sociology 78 (3): 675–715.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, Jonathan. 2019. Populist politics and vaccine hesitancy in western Europe: An analysis of national-level data. European Journal of Public Health 29 (3): 512–516.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kidd, Ian James. 2020. Epistemic corruption and social oppression. In Vice epistemology: Theory and Practice, ed. Ian James Kidd, Quassim Cassam, and Heather Battaly. New York: Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Krumrei-Mancuso, E.J., and S.V. Rouse. 2016. The development and validation of the comprehensive intellectual humility scale. Journal of Personality Assessment 98 (2): 209–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lavric, Aureliu, Gina Rippon, and Jeremy R. Gray. 2003. Threat-evoked anxiety disrupts spatial working memory performance: An attentional account. Cognitive Therapy and Research 27: 489–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leary, Mark R., Kate J. Diebels, Erin K. Davisson, Katrina P. Jongman-Sereno, Jennifer C. Isherwood, Kaitlin T. Raimi, Samantha A. Deffler, and Rick H. Hoyle. 2017. Cognitive and interpersonal features of intellectual humility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 43 (6): 793–813.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, Jennifer S., and Dacher Keltner. 2000. Beyond valence: Toward a model of emotion-specific influences on judgment and choice. Cognition and Emotion 14 (4): 473–493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2001. Fear, anger, and risk. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 81 (1): 146–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levitsky, Steven, and Daniel Ziblatt. 2018. How democracies die. Broadway Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, Paul, Caelainn Barr, Sean Clarke, Antonio Voce, Cath Levett, and Pablo Gutierrez. 2019a. Revealed: The rise and rise of populist rhetoric. The Guardian, March 6, 2019. Accessed March 2020. https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2019/mar/06/revealed-the-rise-and-rise-of-populist-rhetoric.

  • Lewis, Paul, Sean Clarke, and Caelainn Barr. 2019b. How we combed leaders’ speeches to gauge populist rise. The Guardian, March 6, 2019. Accessed March 2020. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/mar/06/how-we-combed-leaders-speeches-to-gauge-populist-rise.

  • Lindquist, K.A., T.D. Wager, H. Kober, E. Bliss-Moreau, and L.F. Barrett. 2012. The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review. Behavioral and Brain Science 35 (3): 121–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindquist, K.A., A.B. Satpute, T.D. Wager, J. Weber, and L.F. Barrett. 2015. The brain basis of positive and negative affect: Evidence from a meta-analysis of the human neuroimaging literature. Cerebral Cortex 26 (5): 1910–1922.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Major, Brenda, Alison Blodorn, and Gregory Major Blascovich. 2016. The threat of increasing diversity: Why many white Americans support Trump in the 2016 presidential election. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations 21: 931–940.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2018. The threat of increasing diversity: Why many white Americans support trump in the 2016 presidential election. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations 21 (6): 931–940.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mansbridge, Jane, and Stephen Macedo. 2019. Populism and democratic theory. Annual Review of Law and Social Science 15 (1): 59–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marcus, George E., W. Russell Neuman, and Michael MacKuen. 2000. Affective intelligence and political judgment. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marcus, George E., John L. Sullivan, Elizabeth Theiss-Morse, and Daniel Stevens. 2005. The emotional foundation of political cognition: The impact of extrinsic anxiety on the formation of political tolerance judgments. Political Psychology 26: 949–964.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGregor, Ian, Mark P. Zanna, John G. Holmes, and Steven J. Spencer. 2001. Compensatory conviction in the face of personal uncertainty: Going to extremes and being oneself. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 80: 472–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montmarquet, James. 1993. Epistemic virtue and doxastic responsibility. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mudde, Cas, and Cristóbal Rovira Kaltwasser. 2013. Exclusionary vs. inclusionary populism: Comparing contemporary Europe and Latin America. Government and Opposition 48 (2): 147–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mummendey, Amelie, and Michael Wenzel. 1999. Social discrimination and tolerance in intergroup relations: Reactions to intergroup difference. Personality and Social Psychology Review 3: 158–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mutz, D.C. 2018. Status threat, not economic hardship, explains the 2016 presidential vote. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 115 (19): E4330–E4339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nai, Alessandro, and Jürgen Maier. 2018. Perceived personality and campaign style of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. Personality and Individual Differences 121: 80–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prasad, Ajnesh. 2020. The organization of ideological discourse in times of unexpected crisis: Explaining how COVID-19 is exploited by populist leaders. Leadership 16 (3): 294–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ray, R.D., and D.H. Zald. 2012. Anatomical insights into the interaction of emotion and cognition in the prefrontal cortex. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews 36 (1): 479–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rico, Guillem, Marc Guinjoan, and Eva Anduiza. 2017. The emotional underpinnings of populism: How anger and fear affect populist attitudes. Swiss Political Science Review 23 (4): 444–461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rooduijn, Matthijs, Wouter van der Brug, and Sarah L. de Lange. 2016. Expressing or fuelling discontent? The relationship between populist voting and political discontent. Electoral Studies 43: 32–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rooduijn, Matthijs, Wouter Van der Brug, Sarah L. De Lange, and Jante Parlevliet. 2017. Persuasive populism? Estimating the effect of populist messages on political cynicism. Politics and Governance 5 (4). https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v5i4.1124.

  • Schneider, Stephen P., and Ingrid J. Haas. (2021, February 22). Political Threat, Ideology, and Conspiracy Endorsement. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/2kb5q

  • Skitka, Linda J., Christopher W. Bauman, Nicholas P. Aramovich, and G. Scott Morgan. 2006. Confrontational and preventative policy responses to terrorism: Anger wants a fight and fear wants "them" to go away. Basic and Applied Social Psychology 28: 375–384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Storbeck, J., and Gerald L. Clore. 2007. On the interdependence of cognition and emotion. Cognition and Emotion 21 (6): 1212–1237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thorisdottir, Hulda, and John T. Jost. 2011. Motivated closed-mindedness mediates the effect of threat on political conservatism. Political Psychology 32 (5): 785–811.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webster, Donna M., and Arie W. Kruglanski. 1994. Individual differences in need for cognitive closure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 67: 1049–1062.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wike, Richard, and Shannon Schumacher. 2020. Democratic rights popular globally but commitment to them not always strong. Pew Research Center, February 27, 2020. Accessed March 2020. https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2020/02/27/democratic-rights-popular-globally-but-commitment-to-them-not-always-strong.

  • Williams, Ethlyn A., Rajnandini Pillai, Bryan J. Deptula, Kevin B. Lowe, and Kate McCombs. 2018. Did charisma ‘Trump’ narcissism in 2016? Leader narcissism, attributed charisma, value congruence and voter choice. Personality and Individual Differences 130: 11–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zagzebski, Linda Trinkaus. 1996. Virtues of the mind: An inquiry into the nature of virtue and the ethical foundations of knowledge. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Political Science, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, USA

    Ingrid J. Haas

  2. Center for Brain, Biology, and Behavior, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, USA

    Ingrid J. Haas

Authors
  1. Ingrid J. Haas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ingrid J. Haas .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of American and Global Studies, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD, USA

    Gregory R. Peterson

  2. School of American and Global Studies, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD, USA

    Michael C. Berhow

  3. School of American and Global Studies, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD, USA

    George Tsakiridis

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Haas, I.J. (2022). Using Political Psychology to Understand Populism, Intellectual Virtues, and Democratic Backsliding. In: Peterson, G.R., Berhow, M.C., Tsakiridis, G. (eds) Engaging Populism. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-05785-4_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation