The Political Brain

The Political Brain: The Role of Emotion in Deciding the Fate of the Nation . By Drew Westen . New York : Public Affairs . 2007 . 384 pp . When television transformed the nature of contemporary campaigning, politicians turned to commercial ad agencies for help in marketing themselves to voters. Madison Avenue's role eventually gave way to a new profession of political consulting, which draws some insights from commercial advertising but adapts them to the specialized demands of politics. Now “neuromarketing”—the study of how consumers' brains respond to ad messages—is all the rage in the field of advertising. Neuromarketers like EmSense Corporation, FKF Applied Research, and Lucid Systems, have even begun to offer services to politicians. Can the rise of political neuroconsulting be far away? Drew Westen may well have written its opening manifesto, The Political Brain. Westen, however, is not a political consultant (well, he wasn't one until he wrote this book, but has since set up a consulting operation on the side). He is in fact a respected clinical psychologist at Emory University. Nonetheless Westen has a professional and a personal interest in politics, both of which are central to the book. As a scholar, he wishes to share his view of the brain and political decision making, shaped by his own research and that of others, in which emotions play a key role. As a citizen with partisan convictions, he hopes to improve the way Democrats appeal to the American public. Since at least the 1980s, political consultants have stressed the importance of emotional persuasion but, in Westen's view, Republicans grasp that in a way Democrats do not. He seeks to complete the emotional revolution in campaign tactics by convincing progressive politicians to adopt a new way of communicating with voters. The book is more than just affirmation of consultants' intuitions. The Political Brain takes lessons from brain science to offer politicians “a blueprint for running emotionally compelling campaigns.” Although the book is overtly partisan in its sympathies, the science from which it takes inspiration is not. Westen provides general guidelines for political communication informed by an understanding of both psychology and politics. In that sense, he aspires for something broader and more grounded than neuromarketing “studies” that have garnered attention (and controversy) in the press by interpreting why presidential candidates cause certain regions of the brain to “light up.” But, having said that, one can imagine Westen's advice inspiring well-funded campaigns to move some of their focus groups from the conference room to the fMRI lab. Westen's view of the brain draws on numerous concepts and bodies of work that will be familiar to political psychologists. His central claim is that the “political brain is an emotional brain . . . not a dispassionate calculating machine.” This argument situates the book nicely in a line of recent scholarship emphasizing emotions as guiding forces in human reasoning and behavior. Westen weaves a view of the emotional brain that draws on several fields, including neuroscience, social and clinical psychology, and political science. It is a view that emphasizes emotional valence. Although Westen regards both global affect (like/dislike) and discrete emotions (e.g., pride, anger, shame) as relevant, he is concerned mainly with the overall impressions created among voters: “managing positive and negative feelings should be the primary goals of a political campaign.” In addition to emotion, two other concepts are particularly important in The Political Brain. One is the motivated reasoning of partisans. The lesson: Democrats should not bother crafting messages to win over (or even avoid offending) Republican partisans. Westen opens the book with the first of several illustrations from his own research. In this case, an fMRI study demonstrates that partisans not only respond in a biased manner that limits the effects of threatening information, but also seem to derive pleasure from doing so. Another key concept is networks of association. Westen advises politicians to worry less about the logic of their appeals and more about the ideas, images, and feelings the appeals call to mind in their intended audience. Coherent narratives and framing matter in political communication because of the associations they do or do not activate (e.g., “No Child Left Behind,”“Clear Skies Act,”“Defense of Marriage,”“Death Tax”). These pieces come together in the first part of the book to reveal Westen's view of the brain and his argument about what it means for political communication. Examples from contemporary politics intermingle with descriptions of academic studies and concepts. The second, longer part of the book offers four principles for crafting persuasive messages: (1) Always try to elicit specific emotions. (2) Frame messages to activate desirable emotional associations and inhibit undesirable associations. (3) Pitch your message at a level of generality that has emotional resonance for people (not too abstract, not too detailed). (4) Appeal to the whole brain by targeting multiple, reinforcing sensory networks (e.g., images, sound, words). Westen illustrates the principles through application to current political issues and campaigns. These examples do not take the form of social science research—there is no evidence other than what “seems” to have been effective—but rather are interpretive exercises. Westen clinically “dissects” specimens from the modern history of political speeches, debates, ads, and other propaganda. He highlights examples of both effective and ineffective message construction; the former usually coming from Republicans or Bill Clinton. One example he admires (for its style, not substance) is the 1994 Republican Contract with America, which he says used “emotionally evocative” metaphors and turns of phrase to activate “emotion-laden networks” in voters’ brains. Examples of message (in)effectiveness are complemented by concrete suggestions for how Democrats should frame their positions more effectively on a range of issues such as abortion, gun control, race, taxes, national security, and family values. For example, Westen criticizes John Kerry (a frequent target) for his response to President George W. Bush's proposal of a constitutional amendment to “protect marriage” in the wake of court rulings authorizing same-sex unions. Kerry issued a terse statement suggesting it is worrisome when a president tampers with the Constitution in a reelection year. Westen argues that, instead, Kerry should have held his own press conference to turn the moral outrage on Bush with a script like this: Mr. Bush, that was one of the most un-Christian things I've ever seen a president of the United States do. The God I worship, and the God most Americans worship, is a God of love, not of hate, and He loves all his children, not just the ones you deem worthy. And He would never countenance building hatred into the sacred Constitution of the United States of America. To divide American against American for political gain, and to dress it up in the language of holiness, is as un-American as it is blasphemous. Regardless of whether readers agree with specific critiques and recommendations (more on this below), Westen does an excellent job of keeping these examples linked back to the scientific view and general principles he is advocating. In this regard, the book reflects the style of a skilled teacher, keeping the reader engaged with interesting and relevant examples, while repeatedly underscoring the lesson. The examples of what politicians should say are the most daring, and most tenuous, moments in The Political Brain. On one hand, offering such advice is a bold, laudable step. It is easy to fill a book with reasonable-sounding principles and criticisms of others' ill-chosen words. It is much harder for an author to provide convincing, concrete examples of how he would implement his own advice. This enables readers to walk away with a solid grasp on what the author recommends, in a way that reciting abstract principles alone does not. On the other hand, this step is also risky. Westen opens himself up to the same critiques he has leveled at politicians. Politicians don't always know how their words will play with the audiences they care about, and neither does Westen. The existence of multiple audiences in the zero-sum competition of elections makes message construction a tricky business. Take, for example, Westen's advice on how Al Gore could have responded better to Bush on gay rights during their second debate: Governor, no one is suggesting we give special rights to anyone, only that we treat all Americans as equal under the law—that we treat all Americans as God's children. It's about loving your neighbor, and recognizing that none of us—not me, not you—is in the position to cast the first stone. So far this seems like a reasonable way for Gore to counter with a moral appeal of his own. It co-opts religious language often used by Republicans and familiar to many Americans. Westen, however, tacks on the following: And if Gore wanted to see the interchange replayed a hundred times on cable—and to demonstrate his own affability (something he desperately needed to do)—he might have added, “But don't worry, Governor, lovin' your neighbor doesn't mean you have to kiss 'em.” There is no doubt that this “zinger” would have become a popular soundbite. And it likely would have been greeted by robust cheers in faculty lounges, liberal blogs, and “fake news” studios across the country. But, more broadly, it might have hurt Gore more than it helped him. The retort may have struck many Americans, especially those Gore may have hoped to win over with the use of religious idiom, as a tasteless and unpresidential cheap shot (i.e., activating some very undesirable emotional associations). Nonetheless, though readers may quibble with specific recommendations, there is no question the inclusion of concrete advice is a net strength for the book. By observing the principles applied in construction as well as critique, readers are likely to come away with a better understanding of the argument. Moreover, the thought exercises enable Westen to habituate readers to his way of thinking about political messages. In sum, The Political Brain is a provocative mix of scientific lecture and partisan advice. Its primary audience is politicians, activists, and other interested observers. Because Westen yearns for political change, he has written a book with greater potential for impact (and sales) than academically oriented volumes. Even so, scholars have more than one reason to take a closer look. First, instructors may find the book useful for college courses on political psychology, political communication, or elections and campaigns. The writing is accessible and engaging, yet rests on a foundation of science. Thus, it could prove an effective point of departure for class discussions. One frustrating downside, however, is that readers must go to a website to find bibliographic notes. Ostensibly this allows hyperlinks, but none were apparent. Second, political psychologists and other scholars will find Westen's vision of why political rhetoric succeeds or fails thought-provoking. It should inspire future research and debate. Finally, though there is little new science between its covers, the book whets readers' appetites for a series of published and unpublished papers, where they can learn the full details about Westen's own exciting research into the political brain

Criminology · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Education and Teacher Training · Law · Psychology · Social Psychology

• Political toxicity in the contrastive perspective (Based on American, British and Ukrainian media discourse)

  Open Access•Nataliia Shkvorchenko•Cognition communication discourse•2023

  Add to list

• How Journalists and Social Media Users Perceive Online Fact-Checking and Verification Services

  P B Brandtzaeg, Asbjørn Følstad et al.•Journalism Practice•2017

  Add to list

• Credibility and/or anxiety - The moderators of political information on migration

  Open Access•Sandra N Morgenstern•Social Science Research•2025

  Add to list