Three alumni of the Center for the Study of Political Psychology have an exciting new article in press at Electoral Studies. In it, they employ data from the 2016 Minnesota Multi-investigator study to replicate their dual-process account of candidate trait evaluation.
The Center for the Study of Political Psychology is proud to co-sponsor a one-day conference on Friday, October 13th, on the role and effectiveness of persuasion, using the high-profile events in Ferguson, Missouri as a case study.
Dr. Golec de Zavala (Goldsmiths, University of London) and Dr. Christopher Federico explore the relationship between collective narcissism and Trump's candidacy. Data discussed in this article comes from the 2016 Minnesota Presidential Election Panel Study (MPEPS).
There’s been an uptick in liberals citing secret plots to explain the Trump administration’s actions. The reverse is true for conservatives. According to Dr. Miller, losing political control can make people more vulnerable to misinformation. (Interview for Press Play with Madeleine Brand)
Chris Johnston (Duke), Howard Lavine (UMN), and Christopher Federico (UMN) show in their upcoming book from Cambridge University Press how deep-seated personality traits underpinning the culture wars over race and immigration, sexuality, gender roles, and religion influence debates about economics.
In new research, Joanne Miller (UMN), Kyle Saunders (Colorado State), and Christina Farhart (UMN) find that conservatives are more likely to endorse ideologically motivated conspiracy theories if they have low levels of trust in government and greater political knowledge. Liberals, on the other hand, are less likely to endorse liberal conspiracy theories if they have both greater political knowledge and more trust in government.