Voting with the Heart

Emotion trumps reason at the ballot box

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Citizens thoughtfully weigh the pros and cons of arguments before choosing their leaders--or so political science has traditionally assumed. Now experiments and computer models are challenging this notion, suggesting that voters tend to make emotional decisions that they rationalize afterward.

Such is the conclusion of political scientist Charles Taber of Stony Brook University and his colleagues, who have examined during the past 10 years how people decide whom they vote for. "Politics, like religion and war, is all about emotions and feelings," Taber says. "The enlightenment model of dis?passionate reason as the duty of citizenship is empirically bankrupt."

Charles Q. Choi is a frequent contributor to Scientific American. His work has also appeared in The New York Times, Science, Nature, Wired, and LiveScience, among others. In his spare time, he has traveled to all seven continents.

More by Charles Q. Choi
Scientific American Magazine Vol 295 Issue 6This article was published with the title “Voting with the Heart” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 295 No. 6 ()
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican122006-48worOYbuAJRx1LWwhgZzC

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe