Political Psychology Projects

This longitudinal study investigates the role of news consumption and partisanship in shaping political and general anxiety over time, leading up to and following the 2024 U.S. presidential election. Data were collected across five waves: March, May, July, September, and November 2024, with a final post-election wave in January 2025. Background variables such as gender, ethnicity, education, income, age, religion, state of residence, and 2020 vote choice were measured in Wave 1. Political attitudes, including partisanship, ideological identification, and 2024 voting intentions or actual choice, were assessed in subsequent waves. The study also explored news consumption patterns and their relationship with general and political anxiety, focusing on variations by partisanship. By examining both general and political anxiety over the election cycle, this research provides insight into the psychological impact of election-related media exposure and partisan identity. It also explores whether anxiety differs based on the election outcome, shedding light on the emotional and political consequences of a polarized political climate.

Previous research has found instances where both nationalism and patriotism predict prejudice. Given the mixed evidence and limitations of prior studies, we seek to expand upon this work with a large sample (N = 1,250) collected by Project Implicit. We will explore the interactive effects between nationalism, patriotism, and group status predicting prejudice against multiple target groups using various measures of prejudice. We will test competing hypotheses using multi-level analysis. One hypothesis suggests that only nationalism will predict prejudice towards low-status groups, while the other suggests that both nationalism and patriotism will predict such prejudice. This study aims to examine further nuances in the relationship between nationalism and patriotism than have been previously documented.

Sexual fantasies are a ubiquitous yet understudied aspect of human sexuality, particularly in relation to political and moral values. This study explores the interplay between kink behaviors, fantasies, and political ideology, testing competing hypotheses informed by moral foundations theory and other psychological frameworks. Using a large online sample, participants will report frequency of engagement in and fantasy about diverse kink items, alongside individual differences measures, such as political ideology, kink identity, religiosity, spirituality, openness to experience, and demographics. Exploratory factor analyses (EFAs) will be conducted separately for kink behaviors and fantasies, with factors expected to reflect distinct themes, such as pain, multipartner sex, or power dynamics. Correlational analyses will examine relationships between political ideology and the extracted factor scores, with anticipated patterns suggesting ideological differences in preferences tied to these themes. The findings aim to elucidate the nuanced connections between political beliefs, moral values, and sexual preferences. By reducing stigma surrounding non--normative sexual preferences, this research lays groundwork for future studies on kink, such as compatibility in cross-party relationships, public policy discourse regarding sexual behavior, barriers to acting on fantasy, and fostering societal dialogue on healthy sexual expression.

The COVID-19 pandemic prompted changes in public health behavior, yet individual differences in precautionary actions remain poorly understood. This study explores the role of just world beliefs (JWB), intellectual humility (IH), and cognitive reflection test (CRT) scores in moderating the relationship between fear of COVID-19 and risk-related behavior, such as social distancing and mask-wearing. Using a sample of 613 participants recruited via MTurk (M = 38.32 years), we examined how these psychological factors influence the likelihood of going out in public and adherence to public health guidelines. Results replicate previous findings showing that higher levels of IH and CRT were associated with more effective precautionary behavior, while higher JWB scores predicted riskier behaviors. Importantly, while JWB, IH, and CRT did not moderate the relationship between fear and public behavior, they did serve as significant predictors. Our findings suggest that JWB may encourage individuals to justify risky behavior through a sense of deservedness, IH may lead to more cautious behavior by increasing trust in health information, and CRT may prompt more critical reflection, reducing the likelihood of engaging in risky activities. These results have important implications for public health interventions, including tailoring messages for individuals based on their cognitive styles, and suggest that providing multiple prevention recommendations may lead to substitution effects, undermining their overall effectiveness. Future research should explore other risk factors and more effective interventions to reduce risky behaviors.