Menus Subscribe Search

Follow us


Republicans Like Candidates Who Look Republican

• January 10, 2012 • 11:27 AM

Although they can’t put their finger on what a Republican looks like, when GOP voters think someone looks Republican, that candidate gets more votes.

Will the Republican who wins the New Hampshire primary be the candidate with the most money, the best message, or … the most Republican mug?

While no scientifically proven criteria exists for what makes a politician look like a Republican, plenty of people seem to think they can spot a party affiliation on a candidate’s face. Maybe it’s something in the eyebrows, or the cheekbones, or the cast of a jaw line (or insert your humorous observation here). Whatever it is people are responding to, new research suggests that looking like a Republican may help politicians win over Republican voters.

“We were interested in seeing whether people could reliably tell the difference between Republicans and Democrats based on their appearance,” said Chris Olivola, a fellow at the University of Warwick and the lead author on the new research published in the journal Social Psychological and Personality Science.

Past studies have revealed that voters tend to prefer politicians who look competent (as the people looking at them define it, that is).

Competency, after all, is subjective. But party affiliation is not. This means researchers could test people’s perceptions of political facial stereotypes against reality — and measure whether those perceptions seemed to have an impact in actual elections.

To do this, Olivola and his co-authors first presented subjects with 256 pairs of rival candidate headshots from gubernatorial elections in the U.S. between 1995 and 2006, and from Senate elections between 2000 and 2008. They excluded any third-party candidates in a race, and then asked subjects (undergraduate students at Princeton) to assess a screen grab such as this one:

[class name=”dont_print_this”]Republican Candidate Test[/class]

Your average undergraduate student at Princeton, it turns out, does a better job at this game than sheer chance would suggest. The more striking findings from the study, however, came out when the researchers compared these perceptions to actual election results and, later, the party affiliations of individual voters.

The more Republican politicians seemed to look to people, the more votes they gained in red states at the actual polls. The facial stereotypes, in other words, predicted the outcomes of real elections. But that wasn’t the strangest finding.

[class name=”dont_print_this”]

Idea Lobby

THE IDEA LOBBY
Miller-McCune's Washington correspondent Emily Badger follows the ideas informing, explaining and influencing government, from the local think tank circuit to academic research that shapes D.C. policy from afar.

[/class]

“To our even greater surprise,” Olivola said, “we found no relationship whatsoever for left-leaning states. We certainly hadn’t predicted that. That was a big surprise.”

Blue states, it appears, didn’t exhibit this phenomenon in the same way.

“For some reason,” Olivola said, “and we don’t know what the reason is — and I should stress these are correlations, we can’t make a strong causation story — what these results suggest at least is that for Republican voters, their votes seem to be influenced to some extent by how Republican versus Democratic the two rival candidates look.”

This finding raises another question: Does this difference between Republican and Democratic voters exist at the macro level — between red states and blue states — or at the individual level, in some distinction between the way liberals and conservatives perceive candidates?

To get at this question, the researchers performed a second set of experiments presenting the same headshot pairs to a group of subjects online. The researchers then asked the subjects about their own political affiliations. The conservative voters, it turned out, were more influenced by the facial stereotypes than the liberals (as their preferences were compared to other participants’ guesses).

This means that conservatives are more likely to be influenced by how Republican they think a candidate looks, whether they live in Massachusetts or Alabama. (It also means, oddly, that a Democratic candidate who looks sort of Republican may actually pick up a couple of Republican voters this way in a right-leaning district.)

So what does all of this imply for the much bigger picture, for our understanding of how voters in a democracy make decisions?

“It’s not a victory for democracy,” Olivola said. “These results do suggest that people seem to be influenced to some extent — not entirely, thank goodness — but to some extent by political candidates’ appearances,” and not just by their brute attractiveness.

And this is all the more mystifying given that voters don’t have to size up a politician’s cheekbones to figure out who the real Republican is. That information is readily available — right there on the ballot.

“Why would a Republican vote for the more Republican-looking candidate if the ballot is telling them, ‘No, the other guys is actually a Republican’? Why would they be swayed to do that? We don’t know. It is kind of worrying.”

The researchers also don’t know exactly what it is in the candidates’ appearances that people are reacting to. They suspect that it’s permanent features (facial structures, for instance), and not ephemeral ones (the sweep of a haircut). But what Olivola would really like to better understand is why liberals and conservatives appear to behave differently with this information.

“I realize with some hesitation that people are going to jump to conclusions about these results and say ‘all Republicans are superficial,’” he said. “I would caution against doing that. We don’t know exactly what’s going on. It’s certainly perplexing. But before we draw any conclusions whatsoever about what could be going on among Republican versus Democrat voters, we need to figure this out. We need to have more data.”

Sign up for the free Miller-McCune.com e-newsletter.

“Like” Miller-McCune on Facebook.

Follow Miller-McCune on Twitter.

Add Miller-McCune.com news to your site.

Subscribe to Miller-McCune

Emily Badger
Emily Badger is a freelance writer living in the Washington, D.C. area who has contributed to The New York Times, International Herald Tribune and The Christian Science Monitor. She previously covered college sports for the Orlando Sentinel and lived and reported in France.

More From Emily Badger

A weekly roundup of the best of Pacific Standard and PSmag.com, delivered straight to your inbox.

Recent Posts

December 22 • 8:00 AM

What Influences Whether Owners Pick Up After Their Dogs?

The presence or absence of suitable receptacles for bags is not the whole picture.


December 22 • 7:04 AM

Coming Soon: This Is How Gangs End


December 22 • 6:00 AM

Politicians Gonna Politic

Is there something to the idea that a politician who no longer faces re-election is free to pursue new policy solutions without needing to kowtow to special interests?


December 20 • 10:28 AM

Flare-Ups

Are my emotions making me ill?


December 19 • 4:00 PM

How a Drug Policy Reform Organization Thinks of the Children

This valuable, newly updated resource for parents is based in the real world.


December 19 • 2:00 PM

Where Did the Ouija Board Come From?

It wasn’t just a toy.


December 19 • 12:00 PM

Social Scientists Can Do More to Eradicate Racial Oppression

Using our knowledge of social systems, all social scientists—black or white, race scholar or not—have an opportunity to challenge white privilege.


December 19 • 10:17 AM

How Scientists Contribute to Bad Science Reporting

By not taking university press officers and research press releases seriously, scientists are often complicit in the media falsehoods they so often deride.


December 19 • 10:00 AM

Pentecostalism in West Africa: A Boon or Barrier to Disease?

How has Ghana stayed Ebola-free despite being at high risk for infection? A look at their American-style Pentecostalism, a religion that threatens to do more harm than good.


December 19 • 8:00 AM

Don’t Text and Drive—Especially If You’re Old

A new study shows that texting while driving becomes even more dangerous with age.


December 19 • 6:12 AM

All That ‘Call of Duty’ With Your Friends Has Not Made You a More Violent Person

But all that solo Call of Duty has.


December 19 • 4:00 AM

Food for Thought: WIC Works

New research finds participation in the federal WIC program, which subsidizes healthy foods for young children, is linked with stronger cognitive development and higher test scores.


December 18 • 4:00 PM

How I Navigated Life as a Newly Sober Mom

Saying “no” to my kids was harder than saying “no” to alcohol. But for their sake and mine, I had to learn to put myself first sometimes.


December 18 • 2:00 PM

Women in Apocalyptic Fiction Shaving Their Armpits

Because our interest in realism apparently only goes so far.


December 18 • 12:00 PM

The Paradox of Choice, 10 Years Later

Paul Hiebert talks to psychologist Barry Schwartz about how modern trends—social media, FOMO, customer review sites—fit in with arguments he made a decade ago in his highly influential book, The Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less.


December 18 • 10:00 AM

What It’s Like to Spend a Few Hours in the Church of Scientology

Wrestling with thetans, attempting to unlock a memory bank, and a personality test seemingly aimed at people with depression. This is Scientology’s “dissemination drill” for potential new members.


December 18 • 8:00 AM

Gendering #BlackLivesMatter: A Feminist Perspective

Black men are stereotyped as violent, while black women are rendered invisible. Here’s why the gendering of black lives matters.


December 18 • 7:06 AM

Apparently You Can Bring Your Religion to Work

New research says offices that encourage talk of religion actually make for happier workplaces.


December 18 • 6:00 AM

The Very Weak and Complicated Links Between Mental Illness and Gun Violence

Vanderbilt University’s Jonathan Metzl and Kenneth MacLeish address our anxieties and correct our assumptions.


December 18 • 4:00 AM

Should Movies Be Rated RD for Reckless Driving?

A new study finds a link between watching films featuring reckless driving and engaging in similar behavior years later.


December 17 • 4:00 PM

How to Run a Drug Dealing Network in Prison

People tend not to hear about the prison drug dealing operations that succeed. Substance.com asks a veteran of the game to explain his system.


December 17 • 2:00 PM

Gender Segregation of Toys Is on the Rise

Charting the use of “toys for boys” and “toys for girls” in American English.


December 17 • 12:41 PM

Why the College Football Playoff Is Terrible But Better Than Before

The sample size is still embarrassingly small, but at least there’s less room for the availability cascade.


December 17 • 11:06 AM

Canadian Kids Have a Serious Smoking Problem

Bootleg cigarette sales could be leading Canadian teens to more serious drugs, a recent study finds.


December 17 • 10:37 AM

A Public Lynching in Sproul Plaza

When photographs of lynching victims showed up on a hallowed site of democracy in action, a provocation was issued—but to whom, by whom, and why?


Follow us


Don’t Text and Drive—Especially If You’re Old

A new study shows that texting while driving becomes even more dangerous with age.

Apparently You Can Bring Your Religion to Work

New research says offices that encourage talk of religion actually make for happier workplaces.

Canadian Kids Have a Serious Smoking Problem

Bootleg cigarette sales could be leading Canadian teens to more serious drugs, a recent study finds.

The Hidden Psychology of the Home Ref

That old myth of home field bias isn’t a myth at all; it’s a statistical fact.

The Big One

One in two United States senators and two in five House members who left office between 1998 and 2004 became lobbyists. November/December 2014

Copyright © 2014 by Pacific Standard and The Miller-McCune Center for Research, Media, and Public Policy. All Rights Reserved.