Voting Affected by Implicit Beliefs

People's deeply held beliefs may contradict what they think they believe--and can affect the choices they make in the voting booth. Steve Mirsky reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

[The following is an exact transcript of this podcast.]

Still lots of undecided voters out there, with less than a week to go before election day. But many of these undecideds may already have made their choice. Even though they themselves won’t learn what it is til they actually pull the lever on November 4th.

Hundreds of studies find that people’s deeply ingrained implicit beliefs can contradict what they say they believe, even what they think they believe. And a recent Italian study found that implicit beliefs strongly predicted voting behavior.

Harvard researcher Mahzarin Banaji runs Project Implicit, which gauges people’s implicit beliefs. One part of the project looks at Obama versus McCain. The study does not use a representative sample. Anybody can take part via a Web site, so study subjects are self-selected. But the findings are still interesting. Self-described independents who take the test actually lean toward Obama. And the test shows that many undecideds who say they’re inclined toward Obama are implicitly more sympathetic to McCain.

You can find out more about your implicit beliefs by taking the Implicit Association Test at www.implicit.harvard.edu

—Steve Mirsky 


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.


60-Second Science is a daily podcast. Subscribe to this Podcast:

RSS | iTunes 

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