A Call to Arms: How 'Fighting' Words Mobilize Political Participation with Aggression

43 Pages Posted: 1 Aug 2011 Last revised: 15 Sep 2011

See all articles by Nathan P. Kalmoe

Nathan P. Kalmoe

George Washington University - School of Media & Public Affairs

Date Written: 2011

Abstract

Politicians on the campaign trail regularly communicate with metaphors of fighting and war, yet little is known about how citizens respond to such appeals. This study demonstrates that violent political rhetoric substantially changes citizens’ motivations to participate in politics by channeling aggression. I field two nationally-representative survey experiments preceding the 2010 midterm elections in which subjects are randomly assigned to different forms of the same political advertisements. I find that violent metaphors increase participation motivations among citizens with aggressive personalities who trust the electoral process, especially for higher-cost acts like voting. Aggressive citizens who distrust elections are demobilized by violent rhetoric. These results uncover new mechanisms by which political campaigns mobilize citizens and show that violent language and aggression in politics can encourage democratically desirable behavior. However, the same processes also promote troubling orientations toward violence in politics, revealing a double-edged sword.

Keywords: violent political rhetoric, trait aggression, participation

Suggested Citation

Kalmoe, Nathan P., A Call to Arms: How 'Fighting' Words Mobilize Political Participation with Aggression (2011). APSA 2011 Annual Meeting Paper, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1902486

Nathan P. Kalmoe (Contact Author)

George Washington University - School of Media & Public Affairs ( email )

Washington, DC 20052
United States

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
95
Abstract Views
719
Rank
406,302
PlumX Metrics