A Single Exposure to the American Flag Shifts Support Toward Republicanism up to 8 Months Later

There is scant evidence that incidental cues in the environment significantly alter people’s political judgments and behavior in a durable way. We report that a brief exposure to the American flag led to a shift toward Republican beliefs, attitudes, and voting behavior among both Republican and Democratic participants, despite their overwhelming belief that exposure to the flag would not influence their behavior. In Experiment 1, which was conducted online during the 2008 U.S. presidential election, a single exposure to an American flag resulted in a significant increase in participants’ Republican voting intentions, voting behavior, political beliefs, and implicit and explicit attitudes, with some effects lasting 8 months after the exposure to the prime. In Experiment 2, we replicated the findings more than a year into the current Democratic presidential term. These results constitute the first evidence that nonconscious priming effects from exposure to a national flag can bias the citizenry toward one political party and can have considerable durability.

[1]  A G Greenwald,et al.  In search of reliable persuasion effects: III. The sleeper effect is dead. Long live the sleeper effect. , 1988, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[2]  L. Skitka Patriotism or Nationalism? Understanding Post-September 11, 2001, Flag-Display Behavior1 , 2005 .

[3]  J. Mueller,et al.  Presidential Popularity from Truman to Johnson , 1970, American Political Science Review.

[4]  Brian A. Nosek,et al.  Understanding and Using the Implicit Association Test: IV: What We Know (So Far) about the Method. , 2007 .

[5]  R. Kosterman,et al.  Toward a measure of patriotic and nationalistic attitudes. , 1989 .

[6]  S. C. Wheeler,et al.  Contextual priming: Where people vote affects how they vote , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[7]  Ran R. Hassin,et al.  Subliminal exposure to national flags affects political thought and behavior , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[8]  Reginald B. Adams,et al.  Polling the Face: Prediction and Consensus across Cultures , 2022 .

[9]  Ran R. Hassin,et al.  Précis of Implicit Nationalism , 2009, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[10]  Thomas D. Cook,et al.  The Persistence of Experimentally Induced Attitude Change , 1978 .

[11]  J. O'neal,et al.  Patriotism or Opinion Leadership? , 2001 .

[12]  Anthony G. Greenwald,et al.  Implicit Race Attitudes Predicted Vote in the 2008 U.S. Presidential Election , 2009 .

[13]  E. Gellner Nations and Nationalism , 1983 .

[14]  Brian A. Nosek,et al.  The Implicit Association Test at Age 7: A Methodological and Conceptual Review , 2007 .

[15]  S. Atran Values, empathy, and fairness across social barriers , 2009 .

[16]  M. Ferguson,et al.  On the Automatic Association Between America and Aggression for News Watchers , 2007, Personality & social psychology bulletin.

[17]  Ran R. Hassin,et al.  IMPLICIT NATIONALISM AS SYSTEM JUSTIFICATION: THE CASE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , 2011 .

[18]  Anthony G. Greenwald,et al.  Increasing voting behavior by asking people if they expect to vote. , 1987 .

[19]  Alan G. Sawyer,et al.  The sleeper effect in persuasion: a meta-analytic review. , 2004, Psychological bulletin.

[20]  Michael Boss Economic theory of democracy , 1974 .

[21]  Angela Jamison,et al.  The Oprah Effect: How Soft News Helps Inattentive Citizens Vote Consistently , 2006, The Journal of Politics.

[22]  S. Gosling,et al.  The Secret Lives of Liberals and Conservatives: Personality Profiles, Interaction Styles, and the Things They Leave Behind , 2008 .

[23]  Lisa Wade Banal Nationalism , 2011 .

[24]  A. Todorov,et al.  Inferences of Competence from Faces Predict Election Outcomes , 2005, Science.