A study has shed new light on the psychological forces shaping the landscape of bipartisanship in the United States. Published in the journal Personality and Individual Differences, the research led by Dritjon Gruda of the Católica Porto Business School and his colleagues suggests that politicians’ attachment orientations influence their willingness to cross party lines.
The motivation behind this research stemmed from the stark polarization gripping U.S. politics. Over recent decades, a widening chasm has emerged between the major political parties, with a growing “us vs. them” mentality.
With 75% of Americans desiring more compromise from their congressional representatives, Gruda and his team sought to shed light on what drives or deters bipartisan efforts. While previous studies have focused on personality traits, the research breaks new ground by investigating how relational traits might play a role in political behavior.
The researchers began by assembling a comprehensive list of U.S. representatives and senators who served in the 113th to the 116th Congresses. This initial step involved gathering demographic information, including age, gender, and party affiliation, from public government sources like congress.gov. The focus was then shifted to the politicians’ digital footprints, specifically their Twitter profiles, which are publicly accessible and rich in personal expression.
To infer the politicians’ attachment orientations, the team employed a machine learning approach. They analyzed the syntax, semantics, and overall language use in tweets, applying algorithms that were specifically designed to predict personality traits based on online behavior and linguistic patterns.
Politicians characterized by an avoidant attachment orientation — those who tend to seek emotional distance, prioritize self-reliance, and have a general skepticism towards relying on others — showed a greater propensity for bipartisanship. This suggests that avoidantly attached politicians may be more open to collaborating with members of the opposite party, possibly because their desire for autonomy and less reliance on close relational bonds make them less bound by party loyalty or peer pressure.
Conversely, anxiously attached politicians — those who have a negative perception of themselves but a positive view of others, leading them to seek reassurance and fear abandonment — were found to be less likely to engage in bipartisan efforts.
This behavior aligns with the theory that anxiously attached individuals prioritize group cohesion and fear actions that could be perceived as betrayal or lead to rejection, such as crossing party lines to cooperate with the opposition. Thus, their political behavior appears driven by a deep-seated need for acceptance within their party, limiting their willingness to pursue bipartisan opportunities.
Another significant finding relates to the influence of state-level cultural tightness-looseness on bipartisanship. Cultural tightness refers to the degree to which states adhere to social norms and tolerate deviations from these norms.
The study found that politicians from culturally tighter states were less likely to be bipartisan. This suggests that in environments where deviation from the norm is less tolerated, there is greater pressure on politicians to conform to party lines, thereby reducing the likelihood of bipartisan behavior.
Moreover, the study uncovered that cultural tightness moderates the relationship between attachment orientation and bipartisanship. Specifically, the negative impact of anxious attachment on bipartisanship was found to be more pronounced in culturally tighter states. This indicates that the cultural context can amplify the inherent tendencies of anxiously attached politicians, making them even less likely to engage in bipartisan efforts when societal norms are rigid.
The use of Twitter data to infer personal traits of politicians raises questions about the accuracy of these inferences, considering tweets may not always be personally authored by the politicians. The research team acknowledges this and suggests that, despite potential discrepancies between a politician’s public persona and their private self, the traits expressed on Twitter are likely aligned with the public image they wish to project, which in turn influences their political behavior.
“It is crucial to consider the unique interpersonal dynamics of elected officials. Members of Congress, adept in navigating complex social landscapes, might display degrees of anxious and avoidant attachment orientations differing from the general population. Nevertheless, our results are in line with prior literature on the link between attachment and group member behaviors and seem to extend in the examined political sample as well.”
“However, we acknowledge that the nuances of a politician’s public and private personas could influence this relationship. This consideration is vital in interpreting our findings and in understanding the complex interplay between personal traits and political behavior in high-stakes environments such as national politics.”
The study, “Every vote you make: Attachment and state culture predict bipartisanship in U.S. Congress,” was authored by Dritjon Gruda, Paul Hanges, Eimante Mikneviciute, Dimitra Karanatsiou, and Athena Vakali.
