Perceptions of politicos affect attention, gaze direction, according to study

October 27, 2014 by Deann Gayman, University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Michael Dodd (background) performing an eye-tracking study. Credit: Craig Chandler | University Communications

Political stances defined as "left" or "right" have no physical spatial connection. The use of the terms in political discourse can be traced back to 18th-century France, when supporters of the revolution sat to the left in the National Assembly, while supporters of the king sat on the right.

More than two centuries later, American political ideologies using the terms "left" or "right" have affected the allocation of attention and the manner in which people move their eyes, a new University of Nebraska-Lincoln study shows.

UNL graduate student Mark Mills worked with Michael Dodd, associate professor of psychology, and political scientists John Hibbing and Kevin Smith on an eyetracking study that suggests people are faster and more likely to respond to the right or left based on how they process the ideologies of various political figures.

There is substantial evidence in past studies that a variety of overlearned spatial stimuli can influence attention even when they are irrelevant to your tasks, Dodd said, and this new study provides evidence that political ideologies labeled as left or right can have the same effect.

"One of the themes of our lab has always been looking at the influence of various stimuli on attentional allocation," he said. "There are numerous things that shift you left and right, like arrows and gaze cues or numbers. This is an extension of that, though a uniquely novel one given the lack of connection between politics and physical space. You don't necessarily think of left and right in politics as it relates to space, even though it's commonly hit with those tags."

The idea for the study came to Mills after he noticed Smith, his political science professor, often hung photos of political figures in line with their political ideologies. In other words, President Barack Obama always ended up on the left side of the room, while former President George W. Bush was hung on the right.

"I thought there might have been some basis for doing that, but he didn't realize he was doing it," Mills said.

The study was conducted in two phases. In the first, the research subjects were shown a picture of a well-known political figure, followed by a target on either side of the screen. When the research subjects located the target, they were asked to press a space bar.

"The picture did not predict where the target would be at all, so the idea is if you're processing the ideology stimulus of a political figure, and it happens to be a liberal person, it activates the leftwards space and you would be faster to respond to the target on the left, and when you see it on the right, you would be slower," Mills said. "They call that the attentional cueing effect."

In the second experiment, a separate set of research subjects looked at a picture of a political figure and were asked to make a voluntary eye movement left or right. Results showed that the political ideology represented by the photo could influence their choice of looking left or right. They are more likely to look left following a Democratic image, or right following the presentation of a Republican image.

"What the results are basically showing is that there is spatial representation in processing political ideologies," Mills said.

Dodd and Mills said the results are somewhat surprising, except for the fact that the terms left and right are abstract terms when used in .

"It's a completely arbitrary spatial association," Mills said.

The study was published Oct. 7 in the journal Behavioural Brain Research.

Explore further: People are attracted to the body odor of others with similar political beliefs

Related Stories

Study examines how uncertainty can affect political tolerance

June 18, 2013

( —It's a safe bet that in the course of perusing the news on a daily basis, you are confronted with political messages that differ from your own beliefs. But how open are you to those viewpoints? Are you in a ...

Recommended for you

Coffee-based colloids for direct solar absorption

March 22, 2019

Solar energy is one of the most promising resources to help reduce fossil fuel consumption and mitigate greenhouse gas emissions to power a sustainable future. Devices presently in use to convert solar energy into thermal ...


Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

1 / 5 (1) Oct 27, 2014
Before assuming that just assigning an arbitrary characteristic to someone causes them to adopt that characteristic, consider first that such politically defined individuals can be weird animals. They surrender their free wil to the party. The party says something is right and they embrace it wholly, to the extent of pushing it, even if unwarranted,m into conversations and applying it as a fundamental principle in "explaining" everything else. Tell such a person that dogs have left handed proteins and cats right handed ones and they will instantly "conclude" that that's why there are "dog people" and "cat people" and they don't mix. There are people like this, who ingrain even a falsehood so deeply, it becomes a facet of their thinking process.
1 / 5 (2) Oct 27, 2014
Given that such politically oriented, or driven, individuals can have such a strange pattern of thinking, the reason for having a proclivity in the direction of their gaze by be rooted there. And the explanation for calling the stances "right" and "left" may derive from that. Did the king assign the different groups to different areas or did they assign themselves, sitting with their compatriots to plot quietly? If the king placed them, maybe he wanted his enemies on his left and friends on the right. ON the other hand, if they assigned themselves, the Revolutionaries may have sat themselves so their enemy, the king, was on their left. Given the claimed reverse nature of brain/reaction connections. This suggests the Liberals are the more calculating, with the Conservatives are the more spontaneous.
1 / 5 (1) Oct 27, 2014
Another display by the Hate Mafia. Viciously, contemptuously, literally sociopathically "awarding" me 1 ratings not as a sign of their assessment of what I said, but only for the craven, sadistic purpose of diluting higher ratings. Not one of them has ever placed actual comments contradicting a single word I said. This is a facet of what makes the PhysOrg comment section a disgrace.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.