Political Affiliation and Empathy 1

The Effect of US Political Party Affiliation on Empathy

Dawn V. Masterson

Department of Counselor Education and Family Therapy, Central Connecticut State University

CNSL 598: Research Methods in Counseling

Dr. Timothy McKay

Political Affiliation and Empathy 2

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to analyze the potential relationship between political party

affiliation and levels of empathy between positive empathy and negative empathy triggers. The

Empathy and Altruism hypothesis (Toi & Batson, 1982) states that someone who is showing true

altruism will assist others, not to help themselves but with the sole purpose of easing the other

person's perceived need. Evidence suggests that empathy is more than just a person’s motivation

to help another but that it can be broken down into several categories (Depow et al., 2021;

Winter et al., 2017.) This study will analyze three of them, emotional processing, cognitive

processing, and motivational processing. Some studies have found that there is a distinct gap

between the Liberal and Conservative parties of the United States in terms of empathy with

Liberals being more empathetic than Conservatives ((Iyer et al., 2012, McFarland, 2010.)

However, other research suggests that there is no difference between levels of empathy (Depow

et al., 2021; Stevens et al., 2021) and that how a person is presented with the option of empathy

will determine if the person expresses these levels or not (von Knorring et al., 2022.) Using

research that shows that positive empathy triggers are more likely to be met with empathy than

negative empathy triggers (Depow et al.,2021) we will be breaking the political parties into

groups separated by positive or negative triggers. This will create four groups that will be

studied, the Positive Empathy group of Liberals, the Positive Empathy group of Conservatives,

the Negative Empathy group of Liberals, and the Negative Empathy group of Conservatives. We

hypothesize that Liberals will show similar levels of empathy between groups but higher levels

of empathy than Conservatives in the negative empathy group. We believe that Conservatives in

the positive empathy group will show high levels than Conservatives in the negative empathy

group, but Liberals and Conservatives will have similar levels in the positive empathy group.
Political Affiliation and Empathy 3

Literature Review

Background

The purpose of this study is to analyze the potential relationship between political party

affiliation and levels of empathy between positive empathy and negative empathy triggers. It

may or may not be a surprise for some people that the perceived difference between political

parties in the USA has risen over the last decade (Doherty, 2017.) Empathy, on the other hand,

shows evidence of declining (Konrath et al., 2016.)

A study by (Gramlich, 2017) found that most American’s consider the gap between the

Liberal and Conservative parties to be either strong or very strong and that this is a bigger

dividing factor than race or socio-economic status. Opposing parties are highly likely to disagree

on policies and even basic facts (Frimer et al., 2017) and members are more likely to trust and

listen to those who share the same ideologies (Stevens et al., 2021.)

Political Party and Empathy

Some research shows that there is a relationship between a person’s political affiliation

and their levels of empathy. In these studies, it is found that Liberals show higher levels of

empathy than Conservatives (Iyer et al., 2012, McFarland, 2010.) It is believed that this occurs

because the Liberals often vote in favor of prosocial policies and in general are more tolerant of

others (Lindner & Nosek, 2009.) However, some believe that there is bias created from how

empathy is measured in these studies (Hasson, 2018.)

Certain studies ask participants to be empathetic toward groups that tend to be more

tolerated by the Democratic party as opposed to the Republican party (i.e. groups that support

affirmative action and welfare) (Chambers, Schlenker, & Collisson, 2013) which could be why

Conservatives are testing lower in these studies. By changing the way empathy is measured
Political Affiliation and Empathy 4

certain studies have found that this empathy gap disappears. For example, (Stevens et al., 2021)

found that trust was more of a factor in determining a person’s empathy levels than their political

affiliation and reasoned that in the absence of direct evidence of trustworthiness we use

predictive factors like ethnicity, gender, and ideological beliefs to project trustworthiness.

Current Study

We propose that for this study three empathy measures be used as the dependent variable.

In past some studies have looked at empathy as a single category or scale (Stevens et al., 2021)

but empathy has been found to be remarkably more complex than this (Li et al., 2023; von

Knorring et al., 2022; Depow et al., 2021) As it is impossible to measure every aspect of

empathy we will use this study to focus on three main aspects (Depow et al., 2021; Winter et al.,

2017) and will use a semi-structured interview to look for themes related to these scales after the

fact.

These empathy measures will be, how much a person shares another’s emotions

(emotional processing), how much a person shares another’s perspective (cognitive processing)

or feels motivated to help them (motivational processing.) Other than political party affiliation

groups will be separated by positive and negative empathy triggers as evidence suggests these

variables share a relationship with political party affiliation as well (Depow et al., 2021; Konrath

et al., 2016.)

Participant Selection

For this study we propose the use of Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (Depow et al., 2021;

Stevens et al., 2021; Hasson et al., 2018) to find a selection of participants who fit into a

predetermined set of criteria created from quota sampling that will occur before the study. This

study will attempt to reflect the US population in terms of ethnicity, sex, education, income, and
Political Affiliation and Empathy 5

geographic region as show in the most recent census (Depow et al., 2021; Hasson et al., 2018.)

Age won’t have an accurate reflection as only those who are of voting age will be allowed to

participate. A sample size of 300 has shown relevance in past studies (Hasson et al., 2018)

although more than 300 will be selected to leave flexibility for outliers or those who do not

complete the study.

Political party will be determined using a self-report measure (Stevens et al., 2021) and

will act as a prescreening test to remove candidates that can be considered as politically neutral.

Candidates will be asked to rate their political affiliation on a scale of 0 (very liberal) to 10 (very

conservative.) Those that test between 0-2 will be placed in the Liberal party and those that test

between 8-10 will be placed in the Conservative party. Those that test outside of those values

will not be chosen for the study.

Method

The purpose of this study is to analyze the potential relationship between political party

affiliation and levels of empathy between positive empathy and negative empathy triggers.

The participants will be separated by their political affiliation and then each party’s

members will randomly be assigned to one of two groups. The groups will be based on the

intended type of empathy that is trying to be elicited. We propose that the groups be separated as

the Positive Empathy group and the Negative Empathy group.

We will have four categories of participants, the Positive Empathy group of Liberals, the

Positive Empathy group of Conservatives, the Negative Empathy group of Liberals, and the

Negative Empathy group of Conservatives. Each group will be asked to read about a person in a

hypothetical scenario that should elicit empathy. The situation will involve a person looking for
Political Affiliation and Empathy 6

their missing dog. One scenario will attempt to elicit positive empathy (ie the owner is feeling

hopeful) and the other negative empathy (ie the owner is feeling hopeless.)

See the hypothetical scenarios below.

Methods Continued Scales and Interviews

We propose the use of scales to assess three measures of empathy emotional empathy,

cognitive empathy, and motivational empathy. The first scale will test emotional processing. The

participants will be asked on a scale of 0 (no levels) to 10 (extreme levels) how well they feel

they share the emotions of the person in the hypothetical situation? To test for manipulation some

participants will receive a reverse scale 0 (extreme levels) or 10 (no levels.)

The second scale will test cognitive processing. The participants will be asked on a scale

of 0 (no levels) to 10 (extreme levels) how well they feel they share the perspective of the person

in the hypothetical situation? To test for manipulation some participants will receive a reverse

scale 0 (extreme levels) or 10 (no levels.)

The third scale will test motivational processing. The participants will be asked on a scale

of 0 (no motivation) to 10(extreme motivation) how much do they feel motivated to help the

person in the hypothetical situation? To test for manipulation some participants will receive a

reverse scale 0 (extreme motivation) or 10 (no motivation.) To test the accuracy of the value of

our empathy groups (positive vs negative) we will ask participants on a scale of 0 (very positive)

to 10 (very negative) to rate the type of emotion they felt the person in the hypothetical condition

was having.

We propose to test the validity of, and create a deeper understanding for, the scales a

semi-structured interview will be conducted. The three questions are as follows.

Political Affiliation and Empathy 7

“What emotions do you think the person in the hypothetical situation was feeling?” “Do

you believe you shared those emotions with them?”

“What thoughts or perspective do you think the person in the hypothetical situation was

having?” “Do you believe you shared those thoughts or perspectives with them?”

“Did you feel motivated to help the person in the hypothetical situation?” “What drove

you to help or not to help?

The interviews will be recorded and then transcribed verbatim so that our researchers can

thoroughly read the answers. Two researchers, separately, will be asked to break the answers into

the main themes. We will ask for the help of outside experienced researchers to read through the

answers and create their themes, as well. These themes will be compared against each

researchers answers.

The hypothetical scenario for the Positive Empathy group will be read as follows. ‘You

are heading down the street on a sunny day and you see a woman who appears to be looking for

something. She stops you. As she smiles, she says, “I lost my dog while we were on a walk. I

feel as though he couldn’t have gone far. I’m sure I’ll find him soon, but could you help me

look?”

The hypothetical scenario for the Negative Empathy group will be read as follows. ‘You

are heading down the street on a sunny day and you see a woman who appears to be looking for

something. She stops you. As she frowns, she says, “I lost my dog while we were on a walk. I

feel as though he has gone far. I’m not sure I’ll find him soon, could you help me look?”

Analysis of Data

An ANCOVA will be run to analyze the relationship between the two independent

variables, Political Party Affiliation and Empathy Group (positive vs negative), and the
Political Affiliation and Empathy 8

dependent variable, levels of empathy.

A regression analysis will be conducted to see if there is a difference in empathy levels

between shared parties, but different empathy groups and one will be run to see if there is a

difference in empathy levels between shared empathy group, but different party. We will also run

a one-way ANOVA between the Group (positive vs negative) and participants’ ratings on the

positive and negative emotions scales to ensure validity.

Analysis of Qualitative Data

We propose a thematic analysis of the answers provided for the semi-structured

interviews. Our researchers will pull themes from the interview answers after which we will

attempt to perform an analysis so that meaning can be drawn from them. It is important to note

that while steps will be taken to prevent bias, it is not completely possible as each researchers’

perspectives will influence how they interpret the results.

Ethical Considerations

This study will be voluntary, and participants will be informed of the nature of the study

before they give their consent to participate. Participants' privacy will be maintained with steps

taken to protect participant information. We are seeking approval from our local Institutional

Review Board, and we will follow the code of ethics outlined by the American Psychological

Association (APA.)

Limitations

Variables such as time and funding constraints will influence the results of this study as

they can affect who we bring in as participants and how the study can be structured. The

participants chosen will influence the study as well since we can only choose those who have
Political Affiliation and Empathy 9

access to a computer. Participants who are physically or mentally unable to complete the study

won’t be included in the sample. Since this is a correlational study causality cannot be inferred.

Delimitations

We have chosen a specific measure of empathy even though empathy is known to be

complicated to measure and define. Those who are not of voting age will not be considered when

performing the study as well as those who identify as politically neutral.

Expected Outcome

There will be a difference in how participants respond in the positive vs negative

empathy groups. As well, Liberals will show higher levels of empathy in the negative groups

than Conservatives. However, levels will be similar between Liberals and Conservatives in the

positive groups. Different themes will be found in the semi-structured interview based on

political affiliation.

Conclusion

Research shows that when presented with positive or negative empathy triggers people

will respond with higher levels of empathy around positive triggers because it takes less energy

to do so (Depow et at., 2021.) Since Liberals are known to be more tolerant in negative situations

than Conservatives (Lindner & Nosek, 2009,) we will see a shift in empathy levels in the

negative trigger groups with Liberals showing higher levels of empathy. In the positive empathy

group, we will find no significance in empathy between Liberals and Conservatives. The semi-

structured interviews will lend insight into the participants’ thought processes with the hope that

we will find themes that shed light on why people measured the way they did.
Political Affiliation and Empathy 10

References

Chambers, J. R., Schlenker, B. R., & Collisson, B. (2013). Ideology and prejudice: The role of
value conflicts. Psychological Science, 24(2), 140–149. https://doi-
org.ccsu.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/0956797612447820

Depow, G. J., Francis, Z., & Inzlicht, M. (2021). The experience of empathy in everyday life.
Psychological Science, 32(8), 1198–1213. https://doi-
org.ccsu.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/0956797621995202

Dhami, M. K., & Mumpower, J. L. (2018). Kenneth R Hammond’s contributions to the study of
judgment and decision making. Judgment and Decision Making, 13(1), 1–22. https://doi-
org.ccsu.idm.oclc.org/10.1017/S1930297500008780

Doherty, C. (2017). Key takeaways on Americans’ growing partisan divide over political
values. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/10/05/take
aways-on-americans-growing-partisan-divide-over-politicalvalues

Frimer, J. A., Skitka, L. J., & Motyl, M. (2017). Liberals and conservatives are similarly
motivated to avoid exposure to one another’s opinions. Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology, 72, 1–12. https://doi-org.ccsu.idm.oclc.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.04.003

Gramlich, C. (2017). Far more Americans say there are strong conflicts between partisans than
between other groups in society. Pew Research Center. https://www.
pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/12/19/far-more-americanssay- there-are-strong-conflicts-
between-partisans-thanbetween- other-groups-in-society

Hasson, Y., Tamir, M., Brahms, K. S., Cohrs, J. C., & Halperin, E. (2018). Are liberals and
conservatives equally motivated to feel empathy toward others? Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 44(10), 1449–1459. https:// doi.org/10.1177/0146167218769867

Iyer, R., Koleva, S., Graham, J., Ditto, P., & Haidt, J. (2012). Understanding libertarian
morality: The psychological dispositions of self-identified libertarians. PLoS ONE, 7(8).
https://doi-org.ccsu.idm.oclc.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0042366

Konrath, S., & Grynberg, D. (2016). The positive (and negative) psychology of empathy. In D. F.
Watt & J. Panksepp (Eds.), Psychology and neurobiology of empathy. (pp. 63–107).
Nova Biomedical Books.

Li, M., Li, J., Zhang, G., Fan, W., Zhong, Y., & Li, H. (2023). The influence of altruistic
personality, interpersonal distance and social observation on prosocial behavior: An
event-related potential (ERP) study. Cognitive, Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience,
23(5), 1460–1472. https://doi-org.ccsu.idm.oclc.org/10.3758/s13415-023-01124-1
Political Affiliation and Empathy 11

Lindner, N. M., & Nosek, B. A. (2009). Alienable speech: Ideological variations in the
application of free-speech principles. Political Psychology, 30(1), 67–92. https://doi-
org.ccsu.idm.oclc.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2008.00681.x

McFarland, S. (2010). Authoritarianism, social dominance, and other roots of generalized

prejudice. Political Psychology, 31(3), 453–477. https://doi-
org.ccsu.idm.oclc.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2010.00765.x

Stevens, S. M., Jago, C. P., Jasko, K., & Heyman, G. D. (2021). Trustworthiness and ideological
similarity (but not ideology) promote empathy. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 47(10), 1452–1465. https://doi-
org.ccsu.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/0146167220972245

Toi, M. and Batson, C. D. (1972). More evidence that empathy is a source of altruistic
motivation, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 281-292.

von Knorring, J., Lehti, A., Fahlström, M., & Semb, O. (2022). Empathy as a silent art—A
doctor´s daily balancing act: A qualitative study of senior doctors’ experiences of
empathy. PLoS ONE, 17(12). https://doi-
org.ccsu.idm.oclc.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0277474

Winter, K., Spengler, S., Bermpohl, F., Singer, T., & Kanske, P. (2017). Social cognition in
aggressive offenders: Impaired empathy, but intact theory of mind. Scientific Reports,
7(1), Article 670. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-00745-0

Zaki, J. (2014). Empathy: A motivated account. Psychological Bulletin, 140(6), 1608–1647.

https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037679