New research conducted in Germany has uncovered a connection between a candidate’s personality and their propensity to engage in positive campaigning. The findings suggest that candidates with certain dark personality traits might be predisposed to highlighting their own virtues and achievements more frequently. The findings were published in the journal Party Politics.
Positive campaigning is characterized by promoting one’s own policies, achievements, and personal virtues. It is not only the most commonly employed strategy but also enjoys widespread voter support for its affirmative content. However, most research on political campaigns focuses on negative campaigning, when criticism is directed from one candidate towards another. The factors influencing a candidate’s likelihood to engage in positive campaigning are less well-understood.
“Most research on aversive personality and political campaigning focuses on negative campaigning,” explained study author Mona Dian, a research assistant at the University of Kaiserslautern-Landau. “Little is known about the association between aversive personality and positive campaigning, although research from other fields shows that people with an aversive personality tend to engage in self-promoting behavior.”
The study included a sample of 2,133 political candidates who ran for election in 10 state parliaments across Germany during the years 2021, 2022, and 2023. For measuring positive campaigning, the candidates were asked to reflect on their recent election campaigns and rate how frequently they promoted their political achievements, plans, positions, or personal qualities in a positive light.
To assess aversive personality traits, the researchers employed the Political Elites Aversive Personality Scale (PEAPS) short scale, a specialized tool designed to capture a range of non-pathological traits, such as Machiavellianism, narcissism, psychopathy, and spitefulness.
Respondents rated their agreement with six statements on a scale from 1 (do not agree at all) to 5 (fully agree): “There have been times when I was willing to suffer some small harm so that I could punish someone else who deserved it”, “I insist on getting the respect I deserve”, “I want my rivals to fail”, “It’s wise to keep track of information that you can use against people later”, “There are things you should hide from other people to preserve your reputation”, and “People who mess with me always regret it”.
In addition to these primary measures, the study also included several control variables, such as political ideology, incumbency status, party governance, gender, and age, to account for other factors that might influence the use of positive campaigning.
Aversive personality traits are often associated with antagonistic behaviors that can be socially problematic or malevolent. Despite these negative connotations, Dian found that candidates with more aversive personality traits engaged in positive campaigning more frequently than their counterparts with less aversive traits. This could suggest that individuals with higher levels of these traits tend to overestimate their qualities and achievements, seeking admiration and attention through self-promotion in the political arena.
While the relationship was significant, the overall explained variance in positive campaigning by aversive personality traits was low. This indicates that while aversive personality traits are a factor in the decision to use positive campaigning, they are only one of many influences on a candidate’s campaign strategy.
“The main result of the study is that the more aversive the candidates’ personality is, the more often they use positive campaigning,” Dian told PsyPost. “Although the share of explained variance is rather low, the association is statistically significant and remains stable when taking political and sociodemographic characteristics into account.”
However, the study is not without its limitations. The context of German state elections, with their unique political and electoral systems, might limit the generalizability of the findings to other settings. Additionally, the cross-sectional nature of the data means that causality cannot be firmly established.
“Aversive personality and positive campaigning were measured using self-reports from the candidates,” Dian noted. “With self-reports, it is always possible that participants respond in a socially desirable way. However, self-reports are also beneficial as they provide first-hand information and allow for the inclusion of lesser-known candidates for whom external assessments are often not available.”
Despite these limitations, the study opens up new avenues for future research. Further investigations could explore how different types of positive messaging, such as personal versus policy-oriented acclaims, are influenced by candidates’ personalities. Additionally, longitudinal studies could provide deeper insights into the stability of personality traits over time and their interaction with campaign communication strategies.
“More research is needed to test if the positive association between aversive personality and positive campaigning is also present in other contexts and samples,” Dian said. “My long-term goal is to further explore how candidates’ personality and other characteristics relate to their campaign communication.”
The study, ““Dark” positivity: Do candidates with a more aversive personality use positive campaigning more often?” was published online on February 19, 2024.
