Simple valence models of political emotion are inadequate

Evidence

A factor analysis of the seven items moves us forward in two ways. First, it permits us to see whether the enthusiasm items hang together and the anxiety items hang together. This is a measurement issue, a matter of fundamental importance. Second, the factor analysis provides a weak test of the valence versus dual-system view of emotional response. The valence model predicts that the enthusiasm and anxiety items will line up in polar opposites; the dual-system model predicts that enthusiasm and anxiety need not be—and are unlikely to be—polar opposites. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 1675

Our empirical work thus sustains a view that emotionality affects how people approach politics. Clearly, emotions are complex and subtle. Just as obviously, the simple valence model of political emotions can no longer stand. At the very least, mood states represent an amalgam of underlying feelings. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 1737

Categorization

• DEFINE: Explains the valence vs. dual-system distinction as testable predictions about item clustering, a genuinely useful conceptual framework.
• XREF: Reverses the simple affective-intelligence assumption that all emotional arousal works the same way; connects to Kahneman’s System-1/System-2 and dual-process models from thinking/fast-and-slow literature.
• corroborated: 3 independent passages support this claim — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 1675; John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 1737