Age differences in affective forecasting and experienced emotion surrounding the 2008 US presidential election

Right and left inferior frontal opercula are involved in discriminating angry and sad facial expressions

Affective forecasts are people's predictions of their future feelings in response to future events. In this study, we examined whether younger and older adults differ in their affective forecasting accuracy. To do so, we recruited younger and older American voters and asked them to predict how they would feel following the 2020 U.S. presidential election. In the general feelings condition, participants predicted how they would feel, in general, following an election victory or loss. In the event-related feelings condition, participants predicted their future feelings specifically about an election victory and about an election loss. Later, these same participants reported their experienced feelings (either in general or about the election outcome). In the general feelings condition, age differences in affective forecasting accuracy varied as a function of whether participants' preferred candidate won or lost the election. Among election victors, there were age-related improvements in affective forecasting accuracy of negative feelings. In contrast, among election losers there were age-related declines in affective forecasting accuracy of both negative and positive feelings. A different pattern emerged for participants in the event-related feelings condition. These participants were highly accurate in their affective forecasts, and there were minimal age differences in forecasting accuracy. Together, these results show that age differences in affective forecasting accuracy depend upon both the type of future event, and the type of future feeling being predicted. When considered together, these results also suggest that the focusing illusion plays a key role in modulating age differences in affective forecasting accuracy. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Neglected Tropical Diseases and the 2012 US Presidential Election

The 2020 US presidential election is still more than a year away, but the media is noisy due to the continuous registration of candidates that will face Trump in the election. Trump has already started to check is rivals through media. So far, Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders seem to have to most possibility to face Trump in the election. Sensitivity analysis was conducted to the data collected from Twitter from the year 2019. The positivity scores have been proved to effect approval ratings, they are estimated to effect the likeliness of becoming the most popular candidate. The data was compared to the past election from 2008, 2012, and 2016. The elections included the past rival background of Obama and McCain, Obama and Romney, Trump and Clinton to show how positive ratings effect the election. Tweets were collected through HTML and Python. The collected data was analyzed using SPSS and MS Excel. Data was defined into three major statuses; positive, negative, and neutral by a lexicon named Valence Aware Dictionary and Sediment Reasoner (VADER). The null hypothesis was rejected through Independent Sample T-Test, Mann-Whitney U Test, Kruskal Wallis Test to show the difference between means. Research results show who will become Trump's estimated competitor for the 2020 election.

Editor's evaluation: Decoding subjective emotional arousal from EEG during an immersive virtual reality experience

Themes of gender, gender roles and relations, and sex played major roles in the 2016 US presidential campaign and election. While Hillary Rodham Clinton’s status as the first woman presidential nom...

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine the shifts in investor sentiment around the last seven US presidential elections (1988 through 2012).Design/methodology/approachInvestor sentiment is measured by changes in closed-end funds discounts, and the results are corroborated with three robustness tests, including an alternate measure of investor sentiment obtained from the survey conducted by the American Association of Individual Investors.FindingsClosed­end funds discounts are significantly diminished from two weeks before a US presidential election to a week before the election, and persist until the week after the election, suggesting an increase in investors’ optimism during that period, particularly when a Democrat is elected president. More than the particular party prevailing, however, investors appear to be more interested in avoiding the entrenchment of power since the results suggest that they become optimistic when a change in the ruling party takes place, but become pessimistic when there is power continuity in the White House. The increase in investor optimism that is observed around the time of US presidential elections is not replicated during non-election years, which seems to corroborate that the elections are indeed driving the results.Originality/valueThis paper is the first to formally examine the relation between investor sentiment and US presidential elections using closed-end funds discounts as the measure for sentiment.

The aim of this paper is to make a zealous effort towards true prediction of the 2016 US Presidential Elections. We propose a novel technique to predict the outcome of US presidential elections using sentiment analysis. For this data was collected from a famous social networking website (SNW) Twitter in form of tweets within a period starting from September 1, 2016 to October 31, 2016. To accomplish this mammoth task of prediction, we build a model in WEKA 3.8 using support vector machine which is a supervised machine learning algorithm. Our results showed that Donald Trump was likely to emerge winner of 2016 US Presidential Elections.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether voters consider a candidate’s brand image when evaluating election alternatives. That is, how prominent a role does the candidate brand image have in the decision-making process? As election outcomes are behavior-driven, the goal is to examine the potential relationship between the candidate brand image, the self-brand image and voting intention. Design/methodology/approach Data were collected for the third week of October 2012 and again for the same time in 2016 – three weeks prior to the US presidential election each year. An online-based nationwide survey was leveraged, followed by correlation, regression and mediation analysis. Findings Candidate brand image has a role in US presidential elections. In addition, candidate brand image and self-brand image are significantly related to voting intention. In both elections, the losing candidate’s brand image was more of a factor when it came to voting intention, as both candidates’ brand image mediated the relationships between self-brand image and voting intention for all voters. Research limitations/implications A link between candidate brand image and voting intention was demonstrated for perhaps the first time. With results showing candidate brand image does relate to the voter’s self-brand image and voting intention, future research should investigate what other brand elements are a factor. There are undoubtedly other factors – some branding-related, others not branding-related – that go into voter decision-making. Because results were stronger for a losing candidate than a winning one, research should also examine whether this occurrence was coincidence or consistent voter behavior. Practical implications When voters considered who might best represent themselves, the brand image of the candidate enhanced the likelihood of voting for, or against, the candidate. Therefore, it is highly recommended that campaign managers understand not only the importance of their candidate’s brand image to develop and maintain a positive image among their supporters but also how to highlight what their supporters view as the negative aspects of the opposing candidates’ brand image to increase the lack of affinity for competitors. Originality/value This research demonstrates, for the first time, that candidates’ brand image is considered by voters in a US presidential election. In addition, it discovers the role candidate brand image plays in voting intention. Finally, it provides direction for campaign managers to conduct research into candidates as brands to build brand relationships with the electorate.

Objective : to study the issues related to the appointment, preparation, conducting and determining the results of the elections of the President of the United States of America (by the example of the 59 th US presidential election). Methods : dialectical approach to cognition of social phenomena allowing to analyze them in historical development and functioning in the context of the totality of objective and subjective factors, which predetermined the following research methods: formal-logical, sociological. Results : apparently, Democrats and Republicans have their own views as to which voting procedures should be in place, how votes should be counted, and what a fair and accurate result is. The US history is full of ballot battles that share certain characteristics with what happened in 2020 and with how new laws are shaping the sixtieth presidential election. The US history is also replete with legal and popular efforts to expand voting rights, ensure that voting procedures are fair and objective, and ensure that those who are sworn into office were the ones actually elected. In this regard, an alert, informed, and active citizenry is absolutely essential for an inclusive, transparent, and fair electoral system in any state. The fifty-ninth presidential election reflected an extraordinarily contentious landscape. The next presidential election may be even more polarizing and there is no assurance that democratic institutions and norms of peaceful succession will hold. Scientific novelty : for first time, the article considers and analyses the issues related to the appointment, preparation, conducting and determining the results of elections of the President of the United States of America (by the example of the 59 th US presidential election). Special attention is paid to restricting ballot access, changing the voting rules, counting the votes, attacking the results and election subversion. Practical significance : the main provisions and conclusions of the article can be used in scientific, pedagogical and law enforcement activities when considering the issues related to the appointment, preparation, conducting and determining the results of the US presidential elections due in 2024.

Cultural differences in emotion: differences in emotional arousal level between the East and the West

Podiatry

Almost all prior literature on affective forecasting in older age has focused exclusively on discrete outcomes in nonsocial contexts (such as winning monetary rewards) and not a single study to date has examined age-related differences in affective forecasting in social contexts. Because close social relationships are prioritized as people age, the present study was designed to provide the first test of how younger and older adults forecast their emotions when anticipating an interaction with a real social partner. We recruited younger and older adults and asked them to forecast their positive and negative emotions in response to a brief face-to-face interaction with a social partner (female confederate) before reporting their actual experienced emotions after the interaction. Participants were randomly assigned to one of two conditions in which they were either primed to perceive closeness with their conversation partner or not. Overall, older adults predicted and experienced more positive and less negative emotions relative to their younger counterparts. However, no other age effects emerged. Both age groups overestimated their negative and underanticipated their positive future emotions to a similar degree (although this latter effect was stronger in the perceived closeness vs. control condition). These findings offer support for the hypothesis that normative shifts in goal orientation and affective experience associated with aging may influence the valence of forecasted and experienced emotion and, importantly, demonstrate that affective forecasting accuracy is not negatively impacted by age. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

A commonly held view is that presidential elections are largely personality contests, and that the candidate with the best‐liked personality wins. But is this really the case? Based on a careful analysis of national survey data from the last 11 presidential elections, this article concludes that such a view is unfounded. The most personally popular candidate does not always win in the U.S.—indeed, in recent elections, the most personally popular candidate has generally lost. Much more central to candidate evaluations, and to who emerges victorious, are perceptions of candidates’ stands on the issues.

IntroductionThe 2020 US Presidential Election captivated the US public resulting in record turnout. In the months preceding the elections COVID-19, racial injustice and the economic downturn had a daily impact on the lives of voters. In this research, we analyze the sleep behavior of Americans in the lead up to the Presidential Elections. We examine specifically the nights of the Presidential and Vice-Presidential Debates and Election Night.MethodsWe examined sleep data from the PSG-validated SleepScore Mobile Application, which uses a non-contact sonar-based method to objectively capture sleep-related metrics and self-reported lifestyle data. The data set included 123,723 nights (5,967 users residing in the US, aged 18-85, mean age: 46.6 +/- 16.7 years, 52.3% female). Data from September 1st until November 3rd were included. This covered the nights of the Presidential Debates (Tuesday 09/29/2020 and Thursday 10/22/2020) and the Vice-Presidential Debate (Wednesday 10/07/2020). Election night was Tuesday, November 3, 2020. Self-reported stress level (0-24 scale) and alcohol consumption (0-9 drinks) were measured using digital slider scales. Mixed Effect Modelling was used for analysis.ResultsThe night of the 1st Presidential debate saw a change in sleep-related behavior with users going to bed 9.5 minutes later, as compared to a regular Tuesday Night. This resulted in a decrease in both TST (11.5 mins, p<0.001) and TIB (11.8 mins, p<0.001). Interestingly, neither the the 2nd Presidential Debate, nor the Vice Presidential Debate resulted in significant differences in sleep behavior. On election night users went to bed 14.5 (p<0.001) min later on average, as compared to a normal Tuesday Night. This resulted in a decrease in both TIB (24.3 mins, p<0.001) and TST (19.2 mins, p<0.001). Self-report data showed a 13.3% (p<0.001) increase in stress level on election night and 34.4% (p<0.001) increase alcohol consumption Importantly, election night was two nights after the end of Daylight Savings Time (DST), Sunday, November 1st.ConclusionThis analysis shows the 2020 US Presidential election negatively impacted US population sleep. The impact was most pronounced on election night, but also observed following the first Presidential debate. The effect of DST on these findings is unknown but surmised to be meaningful.Support (if any):