{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016666666666666666, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.262589928057554, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Angry Voters The influence of anger on voting behavior in the Netherlands

Addressing a shortcoming in theories on the influence of emotion on political decision-making this thesis aims to explore the distinct effects of anger on voting behavior in the Netherlands. The biological origin of emotion and its function in individuals and social interactions, specifically the influence on decision-making processes, are justification for including emotion in a model of vote choice. However, this inclusion should correspond with the biology and theoretical predictions of emotional effects. The most complete and authoritative model which includes emotion is the Theory of Affective Intelligence (AI). Because in the operationalization of anxiety fear and anger are combined, the theory is flawed in this respect. This is an important issue to address since it can have a significant impact on predictions from the model. Predictions that can be used to solve the ongoing debate on the personalization of Dutch politics by pointing to the different circumstances under which voters rely on different decision-making strategies. Using a a online survey to collect data, which included items on candidate traits, policy preferences and ideology, party attachments and background items, the hypotheses for the specific effects of anger were tested in a model based on logistic regression. The survey included a manipulation of the emotional state. Results show some distinct influences of anger and fear. Fear increases the relative weight candidate traits in a vote-choice, whereas anger increases the weight of ideological distance and policy preferences. Furthermore, party-attachments are weak and knowledge seems to have no effect. Table of