Elections in democratic societies are the epitome of public decision-making processes. Voters are tasked with selecting leaders based on a myriad of factors, such as policy preferences, party affiliation, and personal characteristics. In the United States, the gubernatorial elections are among the most consequential after the presidential elections, as governors wield substantial power over state and national policy. Yet, despite the complexity of the electoral process, new research reveals that voters’ decisions may be influenced by something as seemingly superficial as a candidate’s facial appearance.
According to PNAS, this article delves into how rapid judgments of competence, based solely on facial features, can predict electoral outcomes in gubernatorial races. We will present findings from several experiments that support the idea that voters’ “gut feelings” about a candidate’s competence—formed within milliseconds—can significantly influence their voting behavior.
The Significance of Gubernatorial Elections
Gubernatorial races are not only important due to the executive power governors hold within their states but also because governors frequently ascend to national prominence. Historically, many U.S. presidents, including some of the most recent ones, have served as state governors. Furthermore, the financial stakes in gubernatorial campaigns are substantial. For instance, the 36 gubernatorial races in 1998 averaged $14.1 million in expenses, far outstripping the costs of Senate campaigns.
Given the prominence and expense of these races, it is remarkable that rapid judgments of competence based purely on facial appearance can be so predictive of election outcomes. The simplicity and speed of these judgments contrast with the complexity of the electoral process itself, which suggests that non-verbal cues like facial appearance may play a larger role in electoral success than previously thought.
Experiment 1: The Power of First Impressions
In the first experiment, participants were shown pictures of the winners and runners-up from 89 gubernatorial races. They were asked to decide who appeared more competent based solely on facial appearance. To ensure that the judgments were not influenced by prior knowledge of the candidates, participants who recognized any of the faces were excluded from the analysis.
Participants were presented with the images for varying lengths of time: 100 milliseconds, 250 milliseconds, and an unlimited amount of time. Remarkably, participants who viewed the faces for just 100 milliseconds were able to predict the outcomes of the elections with the same accuracy as those who had unlimited time to make their judgments.
Results
Across all time exposure conditions, participants consistently chose the eventual winner as the more competent-looking candidate. The overall accuracy rate of these predictions was significantly above chance, with a mean prediction accuracy of 64%. There was no significant difference in the accuracy of predictions between the 100-millisecond, 250-millisecond, and unlimited-time conditions, though the response times were substantially longer in the unlimited-time condition.
These findings suggest that first impressions—formed in a fraction of a second—are enough to influence judgments of competence and can even predict the outcome of elections.
Experiment 2: Deliberation vs. Intuition
In the second experiment, researchers investigated whether deliberate, thoughtful judgments of competence were more or less accurate than rapid, intuitive judgments. Participants were divided into three groups: one group was asked to deliberate and make a careful decision, another group was given 250 milliseconds to make their judgment, and the third group was forced to respond within 2 seconds.
Results
Participants who were asked to deliberate took significantly longer to make their judgments, but their accuracy in predicting election outcomes was lower than that of participants who made quick decisions. The judgments made under the 2-second deadline and the 250-millisecond exposure condition were both more accurate than those made with deliberation.
These findings indicate that deliberate, thoughtful judgments of competence are less reliable than rapid, intuitive ones. When people are forced to rely on their gut feelings, their judgments are more predictive of actual electoral outcomes.
Experiment 3: Prospective Predictions
In the third experiment, competence judgments were collected two weeks before the 2006 gubernatorial and Senate elections. Participants were shown pictures of the candidates and asked to choose who appeared more competent. These judgments were then compared to the actual election results.
Results
The competence judgments collected before the elections successfully predicted 68.6% of the gubernatorial races and 72.4% of the Senate races. These findings are consistent with the results of the previous experiments, demonstrating that snap judgments of competence can predict election outcomes even when made in advance of the actual vote.
Moreover, the effect of facial appearance on voting decisions was found to be independent of incumbency status. Competence judgments predicted the outcomes of races regardless of whether the candidate was an incumbent, suggesting that facial appearance plays a critical role in voters’ decisions, even when incumbents typically enjoy an advantage.
Discussion: The Role of Facial Appearance in Elections
The findings from these experiments provide compelling evidence that rapid judgments of competence based on facial appearance can predict the outcomes of elections. These snap judgments, formed within milliseconds, are highly intuitive and unreflective. Importantly, they appear to be more accurate than judgments made after deliberation, indicating that voters may rely heavily on their first impressions when making voting decisions.
Psychological Mechanisms
The psychological processes underlying these rapid judgments can be explained by dual-process theories of cognition, such as Daniel Kahneman’s “System 1” and “System 2” thinking. System 1 refers to fast, automatic, and intuitive processing, while System 2 involves slower, more deliberate, and analytical thinking. The experiments in this study suggest that competence judgments from faces rely on System 1 processing, which is fast and effortless.
In contrast, when participants are asked to deliberate and use System 2 thinking, their judgments become less accurate. This finding is consistent with other research showing that deliberation can interfere with the quality of intuitive judgments, particularly when the judgments are based on information that is not easily articulated, such as facial appearance.
The Influence of Facial Appearance on Voting Behavior
The influence of facial appearance on voting decisions raises important questions about the nature of democratic elections. While voters may believe that they are making informed decisions based on policy preferences and party affiliation, these findings suggest that non-verbal cues like facial appearance can have a significant impact on electoral outcomes. In many cases, voters may not even be aware of the extent to which their decisions are influenced by a candidate’s appearance.
This effect is particularly relevant in close elections, where undecided voters and those with weak party affiliations can swing the result. For these voters, a candidate’s appearance may be one of the few pieces of information they have to go on, and their snap judgments of competence could ultimately determine the outcome of the election.
Implications for Political Campaigns
The results of these experiments have significant implications for political campaigns. Candidates who are perceived as more competent based on their facial appearance are more likely to win elections, even when other factors such as incumbency and party affiliation are taken into account. This suggests that candidates with less “competent” facial features may be at a disadvantage, regardless of their actual qualifications or political platform.
Campaigns that focus on improving a candidate’s image, especially through visual media, may therefore have a greater impact than previously thought. Candidates who can project an image of competence through their facial appearance may have a better chance of winning over undecided voters, particularly in close races.
Ethical Considerations
The fact that something as superficial as facial appearance can influence voting decisions raises ethical concerns about the nature of democratic elections. If voters are basing their decisions on candidates’ facial features rather than their qualifications or policies, this could undermine the legitimacy of the electoral process. It is important for voters to be aware of the potential influence of non-verbal cues on their decisions and to critically evaluate candidates based on more substantive factors.
Conclusion
In conclusion, this article highlights the power of first impressions in shaping voting behavior. Rapid, unreflective judgments of competence from facial appearance can predict the outcomes of gubernatorial elections with remarkable accuracy, even when those judgments are made after just 100 milliseconds of exposure. These findings suggest that facial appearance plays a significant role in electoral success, often without voters being consciously aware of it.
While this research sheds light on the psychological mechanisms underlying voting behavior, it also raises important questions about the fairness and transparency of democratic elections. As political campaigns become increasingly focused on image and presentation, it is crucial for voters to remain vigilant and ensure that their decisions are based on more than just a candidate’s appearance.
Ultimately, the findings of this research underscore the importance of understanding the subconscious factors that influence voting behavior. By doing so, we can better appreciate the complexity of the electoral process and work towards a more informed and democratic society.
References:
- Todorov, A., Mandisodza, A. N., Goren, A., & Hall, C. C. (2005). Inferences of competence from faces predict election outcomes. Science, 308(5728), 1623-1626.
- Benjamin, D., & Shapiro, J. (2009). Thin-slice judgments in gubernatorial debates. PNAS, 106(6), 1711-1716.
- Kahneman, D. (2011
