Advertisement

The moral–emotional foundations of political discourse: a comparative analysis of the speech records of the U.S. and the Japanese legislatures

  • Hiroki TakikawaEmail author
  • Takuto Sakamoto
Article

Abstract

There is a growing body of research that focuses on the supposedly close association between an individual’s moral–emotional behavior and his/her political ideology. A prominent example is Haidt’s “moral psychology,” which claims that political liberals and conservatives draw on mutually different sets of moral foundations. However, this and other arguments, which have mostly been advanced in the social context of the United States, lack a comparative perspective. In this study, we examine these arguments in broader spatio-temporal settings by way of a comparative analysis of public deliberations in the U.S. and Japanese legislatures. More specifically, with the help of well-established moral- and emotional-word dictionaries, and employing advanced computational techniques for systematic data collection, we analyze a large volume of speech data that records floor debates over decades in the U.S. Congress and the Japanese Diet to derive longitudinal moral–emotional dynamics. We then use multilevel modeling to regress the derived moral–emotional patterns of legislative deliberations in each country on various covariates to locate possible drivers of these patterns. The results of these analyses reveal more qualified relationships between a moral–emotional framework and political ideology than preceding arguments have suggested, casting serious doubt on the widespread tendency in the literature to quickly rely on an ideological explanation. The findings suggest the need for a more comprehensive approach to handling moral–emotional phenomena in political science.

Keywords

Moral psychology Moral foundation theory Sentiment analysis Natural language processing Comparative analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank participants in the 3rd International Conference on Computational Social Science in Cologne, Germany for their valuable comments. We also acknowledge financial support from Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) (JSPS KAKENHI; Grant Numbers: 16K04027, 16K13347 and 18H03621).

Supplementary material

11135_2019_912_MOESM1_ESM.docx (36 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 36 kb)

References

  1. Aavik, T., Allik, J.: The structure of Estonian personal values: a lexical approach. Eur. J. Personal. 16(3), 221–235 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barker, D.C., Tinnick, J.D.: Competing visions of parental roles and ideological constraint. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 100, 249–263 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., Walker, S.: Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J. Stat. Softw. 67, 1–48 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bentley, A.F.: The Process of Government: A Study of Social Pressures. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1908)Google Scholar
  5. Boutyline, A., Vaisey, S.: Belief network analysis: a relational approach to understanding the structure of attitudes. Am. J. Sociol. 122, 1371–1447 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brader, T.: Striking a responsive chord: how political ads motivate and persuade voters by appealing to emotions. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 49, 388–405 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brooks, A.C.: Gross National Happiness: Why Happiness Matters for America—And How We Can Get More of It. Basic Books, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  8. Caprara, G., Schwartz, S., Capanna, C., Vecchione, M., Barbaranelli, C.: Personality and politics: values, traits, and political choice. Political Psychol. 27, 1–28 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Christen, M., Narvaez, D., Tanner, C., Ott, T.: Using thesauruses as a heuristics for mapping values. Cogn. Syst. Res. 40, 59–74 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Damasio, A.R.: A second chance for emotion. In: Lane, R., Nadel, L. (eds.) Cognitive Neuroscience of Emotion, pp. 12–23. Oxford University Press, New York (2000)Google Scholar
  11. Dehghani, M., Johnson, K., Hoover, J., Sagi, E., Garten, J., Parmar, N.J., Vaisey, S., Iliev, R., Graham, J.: Purity homophily in social networks. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 145, 366–375 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Downs, A.: An Economic Theory of Democracy. Harper, New York (1957)Google Scholar
  13. Fiorina, M.P., Abrams, S.J., Pope, J.: Culture War? The Myth of a Polarized America (Great Questions in Politics), 3rd edn. Longman, Boston (2011)Google Scholar
  14. Gaunder, A.L.: Japanese Politics and Government. Routledge, New York (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gelman, A.: Red State, Blue State, Rich State, Poor State: Why Americans Vote the Way They Do. Princeton University Press, Princeton (2008)Google Scholar
  16. Gelman, A., Hill, J.: Data Analysis Using Regression and Multilevel/Hierarchical Models. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gilens, M., Page, B.I.: Testing theories of American politics: elites, interest groups, and average citizens. Perspect. Politics 12, 564–581 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Graham, J., Haidt, J., Nosek, B.A.: Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 96, 1029–1046 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Habermas, J.: The Theory of Communicative Action. Beacon, Boston (1984)Google Scholar
  20. Haidt, J.: The emotional dog and its rational tail: a social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychol. Rev. 108, 814 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Haidt, J.: The Righteous Mind. Pantheon Books, New York (2012a)Google Scholar
  22. Haidt, J.: Which party owns which words? https://righteousmind.com/which-party-owns-which-words/accessed. Accessed 9 Oct 2018 (2012b)
  23. Haidt, J., Graham, J.: When morality opposes justice: conservatives have moral intuitions that liberals may not recognize. Soc. Justice Res. 20, 98–116 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Haselmayer, M., Jenny, M.: Sentiment analysis of political communication: combining a dictionary approach with crowdcoding. Qual. Quant. 51, 2623–2646 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Higashiyama, M., Inui K., Matsumoto, Y.: Learning sentiment of nouns from selectional preferences of verbs and adjectives. In: Proceedings of the 14th Annual Meeting of the Association for Natural Language Processing, pp. 584–587 (2008)Google Scholar
  26. Hitlin, S., Vaisey, S.: The new sociology of morality. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 39, 51–68 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hoover, J., Dehghani, M., Johnson, K., Iliev, R., Graham, J.: Into the wild: big data analytics in moral psychology. Structure 7, 269–279 (2016)Google Scholar
  28. Jacob, J., Ethan, K., Suresh, N., Laurence, W.-S.: Political polarization and the dynamics of political language: evidence from 130 years of partisan speech. Brook. Pap. Econ. Act. 45, 1–81 (2012)Google Scholar
  29. Kahneman, D., Tversky, A.: The psychology of preferences. Sci. Am. 246, 160–173 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kern, M.: 30-Second Politics. Insight Books, New York (1989)Google Scholar
  31. Kohno, M.: Japan’s Postwar Party Politics. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1997)Google Scholar
  32. Lakoff, G.: Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lees, J.D., Shaw, M.T.: Committees in Legislatures: A Comparative Analysis. Duke University Press, Durham (1979)Google Scholar
  34. Lipset, S.M., Rokkan, S.: Party Systems and Voter Alignments: Cross-National Perspectives. Free Press, New York (1967)Google Scholar
  35. Marcus, G.E.: Emotions in politics. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 3, 221–250 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. McCarty, N.M., Poole, K.T., Rosenthal, H.: Polarized America: The Dance of Ideology and Unequal Riches. (Walras-Pareto Lectures). MIT Press, Cambridge (2016)Google Scholar
  37. Mochizuki, M.: Managing and influencing the Japanese legislative process: the role of parties and the national diet. Ph.D. Thesis. Harvard University (1982)Google Scholar
  38. Muramatsu, M., Ito, M., Tsujinaka, Y.: Pressure Groups in Postwar Japan (Sengo Nihon no Atsuryoku Dantai). Toyo Keizai Inc., Tokyo (1986). (in Japanese) Google Scholar
  39. Napier, J.L., Jost, J.T.: Why are conservatives happier than liberals? Psychol. Sci. 19, 565–572 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Neiman, J.L., Gonzalez, F.J., Wilkinson, K., Smith, K.B., Hibbing, J.R.: Speaking different languages or reading from the same script? Word usage of democratic and republican politicians. Political Commun. 33, 212–240 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Onraet, E., Van Hiel, A., Dhont, K.: The relationship between right-wing ideological attitudes and psychological well-being. Personal Soc. Psychol. Bull. 39, 509–522 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Pennebaker, J.W., Francis, M.E., Booth, R.J.: Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count. Erlbaum, Mahwah (2003)Google Scholar
  43. Perloff, R.M., Kinsey, D.: Political advertising as seen by consultants and journalists. J. Advert. Res. 32, 53–60 (1992)Google Scholar
  44. Polsby, N.: Legislature. In: Greenstein, F., Polsby, N. (eds.) Handbook of Political Science, vol. 5. Addison Wesley Publishing Company, Boston (1975)Google Scholar
  45. Portman, A.: From Might to Mandate: Values in Rulers’ Public Speeches in Finland 1809–2000. Publications of the Department of Social Research (2014)Google Scholar
  46. Sagi, E., Dehghani, M.: Measuring moral rhetoric in text. Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev. 32, 132–144 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sakamoto, T., Takikawa, H.: Cross-national measurement of polarization in political discourse: analyzing floor debate in the U.S. and the Japanese legislatures. In: Proceedings of 2017 IEEE International Conference on Big Data, abs/1711.02977, pp. 3022–3028 (2017)Google Scholar
  48. Sartori, G.: Parties and Party Systems: A Framework for Analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1976)Google Scholar
  49. Schlenker, B.R., Chambers, J.R., Le, B.M.: Conservatives are happier than liberals, but why? Political ideology, personality, and life satisfaction. J. Res. Personal. 46, 127–146 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Schwartz, S.: Universals in the content and structure of values: theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 25, 1–65 (1992)Google Scholar
  51. Schwartz, N.: Emotion, cognition, and decision-making. Cognit. Emot. 14, 433–440 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Schwartz, S.: Are there universal aspects in the structure and contents of human values? J. Soc. Issues 50, 19–45 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Shinoda, T.: Contemporary Japanese Politics: Institutional Changes and Power Shifts. Columbia University Press, New York (2013)Google Scholar
  54. Sylwester, K., Purver, M.: Twitter language use reflects psychological differences between democrats and republicans. PLoS ONE 10, e0137422 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Truman, D.B.: The Governmental Process, 2d edn. Alfred A. Knopf, New York (1971)Google Scholar
  56. Vaisey, S., Miles, A.: Tools from moral psychology for measuring personal moral culture. Theor. Soc. 43, 311–332 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Wilson, T., Wiebe, J., Hoffman, P.: Recognizing contextual polarity in phrase-level sentiment analysis. In: Proceedings of the Human Language Technology Conference and Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (HLT/EMNLP), Vancouver, Canada, 6–8 October, pp. 347–354. Association for Computational Linguistics (2005)Google Scholar
  58. Wojcik, S.P., Hovasapian, A., Graham, J., Motyl, M., Ditto, P.H.: Conservatives report, but liberals display, greater happiness. Science 347, 1243–1246 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Young, L., Soroka, S.: Affective news: the automated coding of sentiment in political texts. Political Commun. 29, 205–231 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate School of Arts and LettersTohoku UniversitySendaiJapan
  2. 2.Graduate School of Arts and SciencesUniversity of TokyoTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations