Title: Experiments in political communications
Description: I present three papers that extend psychological and behavioral research into political communications. The first paper begins with the premise that people often experience tension over certain choices (e.g., they should reduce their gas consumption or increase their savings, but they do not want to). Some posit that this tension arises from the competing interests of a deliberative "should" self and an affective "want" self. It shows that people are more likely to select choices that serve the should self (should-choices) when the choices will be implemented in the distant rather than the near future. This "future lock-in effect" is explored in four experiments involving donation, public policy, and self-improvement. The second paper shows that people's expectations about voter turnout can affect their motivation to vote. The fact that many citizens fail to vote is often cited to motivate others to vote. Psychological research on descriptive social norms suggests that emphasizing the opposite-that many do vote-would be a more effective message. In two get-out-the-vote field experiments, the paper shows that messages emphasizing low expected turnout are less effective in motivating voters than messages emphasizing high expected turnout. The results suggest that voter mobilization efforts should emphasize high turnout, especially when targeting occasional and infrequent voters. More generally, these findings suggest that the common lamentation by the media and politicians regarding low participation may undermine turnout.

The third paper extends the second by examining how turnout expectations affect actual voting behavior. It also tests the impact of two additional psychological principles in voter communications: self-prediction and implementation intentions. The paper shows that eliciting a self-prediction about whether one will vote increases turnout, and that formulating the implementation plan of how one will vote (i.e., implementation intentions) nonsignificantly increases turnout above the self-prediction effect. Inconsistent with the second paper, this paper finds that emphasizing low expected turnout increases actual turnout relative to a control, and relative to emphasizing high expected turnout. I speculate about why. These three papers show that psychological insights can enrich our understanding of what motivates political behavior, and how to increase political action.