The effect of attitudes on emotional reactions to ... - Springer Link

THE EFFECT OF ATTITUDES ON EMOTIONAL REACTIONS TO EXPRESSIVE DISPLAYS OF POLITICAL LEADERS Gregory J. McHugo John T. Lanzetta Lauren K. Bush

ABSTRACT: One hundred subjects participated in an experiment to assess emotional reactions to the expressive displays of political leaders. Attitudes were assessed through questionnaire items, and facial EMG, heart rate, and skin conductance were recorded while subjects watched silent expressive displays of intense happiness/reassurance, mild happiness/reassurance, and anger/threat by President Reagan and Senator Hart. Half of the subjects reported their global affective reaction during each display, and all subjects reported discrete emotional reactions following each display. For Reagan, main effects were found for display type and for prior attitude in the self-report scales and in facial EMG, although significant Prior Attitude X Display interactions indicated that the intense happiness/reassurance displays most strongly differentiated supporters from opponents. Main effects were found for Hart's displays on the self-report scales and on facial EMG, and post hoc analyses revealed attitude effects. These results support previous research conceming affective reactions to dynamic expressive displays of emotion, but they also show the possible influence of prior attitude toward the expressor on both somatic and subjective measures of emotional response.

Expressive displays of emotion are information-laden and evocative; they provide dispositional and situational information, and they can produce emotional reactions in observers. Numerous aversive classical conditioning experiments have shown that static images (slides) of facial expresThis research was supported by National Science Foundation Grant SES 83-10176 and the Lincoln Filene Endowrnent to Dartrnouth College and was part of a collaborative project involving Professors Roger D. Masters and Denis G. Sullivan of the Government Department at Dartmouth College. The authors thank Alice Feola for her assistance in preparing the stimulus videotapes. Lauren Bush is now at the Departrnent of Psychology; University of Washington, Seattle, WA. John Lanzetta, out friend and colleague, who contributed so rauch to this project, died in October 1989 after a year-long illness. Requests for reprints may be addressed to: Gregory J. McHugo, Department of Psychology, Dartmouth College, Gerry Hall, Hanover, NH 03755. Iournal of Nonverbal Behavior 15(I), Spring 1991 © 1991 Human Sciences Press. Inc.

19

20 IOURNAL OF NONVERBAL BEHAVlOR

sions of happiness are inhibitory stimuli for electrodermal reactions, whereas expressions of fear or anger are excitatory (Dimberg, 1986; Lanzetta & Orr, 1980, 1981, 1986; Ohman, 1986; Ohman & Dimberg, 1978; Orr & Lanzetta, 1980, 1984). Along similar lines, social referencing experiments have shown, for example, that human infants on a visual cliff use their mother's smile or look of fear as a signal of safety or danger, respec~ tively (e.g., Klinnert, Campos, Sorce, Emde, & Svejda, 1983). Thus, expressive displays of emotion, through innate mechanisms and early learning, communicate the feelings and appraisals of others, thereby developing expectations in observers concerning future behavior and likely outcomes in a given situation. In addition to their role as social signals, facial expressions of emotion can evoke facial muscle and autonomic responses in observers, thereby providing a basis for social interaction and empathy. For example, Vaughan and Lanzetta (1980) used a vicarious classical conditioning procedure to show that the pain grimace of a model subject functioned as an unconditioned stimulus for autonomic and facial muscle responses in viewing subjects, and Dimberg (1982) showed that viewing static expressions of happiness and anger led to facial muscle and heart rate changes in observers. These empathic processes, through which people share, and reciprocally communicate, the feelings of others, include innate, conditioned, and mimetic responses, as well as higher-order cognitions deveb oped through socialization (cf. Hoffman, 1978, 1984). But what happens when the sender is not a stranger but rather is a friend or ally, or maybe an enemy or competitor? That is, how does the relationship between the observer and the sender influence the effect of expressive displays? Experience suggests that we share the triumphs and failures of those we like or with whom we are affiliated, but we may feel quite differently in response to the emotions of an adversary. In an expedmental analogue, Englis, Vaughan, and Lanzetta (1982) showed that observer subjects were empathic in their psychophysiological reaction toward a model subject whose smile signalled reward and whose frown signalled punishment, but observers developed counter-empathic reactions under conditions where the model's smile signalled punishment and his frown signalled reward. Follow-up experiments further supported the proposition that emotional reactions to the expressive displays of others depend on the context in which they are observed. Empathic reactions occurred when the relationship with the sender was cooperative or the sender was perceived as an in-group member, but counter-empathic (or indifferent) reactions occurred when the sender was seen as competitive or as an out-group meinber (Englis, 1984; Lanzetta & Englis, 1989).

21 GREGORY J. McHUGO, JOHN T. LANZETTA, AND LAUREN K. BUSH

In seeking to extend these findings beyond the laboratory, where the stimuli are primarily posed expressions, and conditioning procedures have been used, we realized that television coverage of political leaders could provide stimuli of greater ecological validity and afford conditions in which the interaction of a politician's expressive behavior and viewers' attitudes toward the politician could be investigated. Out initial experiments showed that the expressive displays of political leaders, as seen on television, are evocative, even as silent images and without experimental contingencies; subjects reported distinct patterns of emotions following different types of expressive displays (see review by Lanzetta, Sullivan, Masters, & McHugo, 1985). As part of this earlier research, we conducted an experiment that included measures of viewers' expressive behavior (multi-site facial EMG) and autonomic responses. Brief excerpts, in which President Reagan expressed happiness/reassurance, anger/threat, or fear/evasion, were chosen from televised appearances according to well-specified criteria (see Masters, Sullivan, Lanzetta, McHugo, & Englis, 1986). The results showed that subjects experienced differentiated affective reactions while watching Reagan's expressive displays (McHugo, Lanzetta, Sullivan, Masters, & Englis, 1985). Consistent with subjects' reported emotions, the tensional patterning in their facial muscles indicated covert smiling during the happiness/ reassurance displays and covert frowning during both types of negative displays. These facial reactions, along with congruent (but weak) autonomic changes, were found more clearly when subjects viewed silent displays than when they viewed the same excerpts with the accompanying sound. Thus, the effects on facial and autonomic responses found in previous experiments with both static and dynamic posed expressive displays were extended to naturally occurring expressive displays exhibited by a political leader on television. Moreover, self-reported emotions following exposure to expressive displays of political leaders were also influenced by subjects' prior attitudes toward the politicians (see Lanzetta et al., 1985). Most citizens have well-formed attitudes toward prominent political leaders, and their reported emotional reactions following brief television excerpts apparently reflected these predispositions, which are themselves evaluative and hence based in part on past affective responses (cf., Abelson, Kinder, Peters, & Fiske, 1982). Thus, for example, President Reagan's supporters reported more positive emotion following his happinesslreassurance displays than did bis opponents, who, in turn, reported more negative emotion following fearlevasion displays than did supporters. In general, supporters reported more differentiated reactions to expressive displays than did opponents,

22 JOURNALOF NONVERBALBEHAVIOR which suggests that an observer's prior attitude toward someone reflects the extent to which he or she will be empathic toward, or at least responrsive to, the emotional communications of that person. Yet, despite the influence of prior attitude on self-reported emotions, we did not find reliable attitude effects to Reagan's expressive displays on the facial EMG o~ autonomic measures. The absence of attitude effects at the peripheral physiologica[ leve[~ coupled with strong attitude effects in the self-reports, suggested a primary role for expressive displays in evoking emotional reactions in viewers. Attio tude toward Reagan seems not to have been salient until subjects were requested to report their emotional reactions verbally. Otherwise, prior attitude should have modified expressive facial muscle responses in a way that would reflect the combined effects of reactions to the display and to the person, since others have shown that facial EMG can detect the affec~ tive component of attitudes (e.g., Cacioppo & Petty, 1979; Cacioppo, Petty, & MarshalI-Goodell, 1984). It is as if subjects viewed a compound stimulus, one element of which was the expressive display and the other was that set of cues that define the unique identity of the person. The former, the disembodied expressive display, is capable of evoking emotional responses on its own, hut this reaction may be modified, at least in verbal reports, when the expressive display "belongs to" someone toward whom a prior affective disposition is held. A hierarchical model such as Leventhal's perceptual-motor theory of emotion (Leventhal, 1980, 1984) suggests that expressive displays of emotion could evoke reactions at the sensory-motor and schematic.levels that are basic and due to innate mechanisms and early learning, respectively. Thus, one might expect reflexive facial movements to occur in response to the display itself, quite independent of the person actually expressing emotion. However, responses to the specific person expressing emotion would derive from the conceptual level, where volitional control of the emotional reaction may be instigated, or from higher schematic levels where a person-specific schema, with its attendant evaluative components, would be activated. For example, e×pressive displays of happiness/reassurance reliably elicit stalles in observers due to a host of cues that are distinct from those identifying the smiler, although, depending on the situation, those person-specific cues may themselves activate higher-level processes that modulate the observer's emotional response to the display. Thus, the contagion of the smile may be potentiated if the observer is positively disposed toward the smiler, hut it may be inhibited if the observer is negatively disposed toward the smiler. In our earlier experiment, Reagan's displays elicited expressive reac-

23 GREGORYJ. McHUGO, lOHN T. LANZETTA,AND LAURENK. BUSH tions in viewers, which were not modified by attitudes toward hirn; only when subjects reported verbally on their emotional reactions did their dispositions toward Reagan influence their responses. As noted above, it is theoretically plausible to predict that facial reactions to expressive displays are reflexive and somewhat invariant, but it is also possible that subjects' prior affective dispositions toward Reagan were not sufficiently activated during viewing of bis displays to influence the mimetic responses. One goal of the present study was to test these alternative hypotheses by increasing the likelihood that subjects' attitudes toward the politicians would be activated during viewing. If activation of prior dispositional responses influences the level of processing of the expressive cues, then the immediate emotional response to Reagan's image should reflect the joint influence of the expressive display and prior dispositions. In order to enhance the salience of prior attitudes and thereby increase the likelihood that they would be activated dufing viewing of the expressive displays, the experiment reported here differed from our earlier study in several important ways. First, two politicians were used who represented opposing political parties and contrasting ideological positions. President Reagan was used in order to provide benchmark comparisons with the previous experiment, and Senator Gary Hart was used because he ~,as a prominent Democrat, an active presidential candidate, and, like Reagan, effective on television. ~ In the first experiment where subjects viewed only Reagan, they may have viewed hirn as President and suspended partisan and person-specific evaluations in deference to his role. In the present study subjects viewed both Reagan and Hart in a context in which they were presented as opposing politicians. Thus, responses to President Reagan, political figure, should differ from responses to the President of the United Stares, per se, which may be influenced by role-specific attributions and societal norms. This juxtaposition of two politicians might then enhance identification among supporters and legitimize rejection among op° ponents, making subjects more evaluative during the exposure to the expressive displays. In addition to using two political leaders, a between-subjects manipulation was added to this experiment, which involved probing half of the subjects for a global affective reaction dufing each excerpt. In the previous experiment subjects may have suspended judgment while watching the displays and only become evaluative when asked for a verbal self-report. This could account for the differential influence of prior attitude on the 1Thisexperimentwas conducted in winter 1985-1986,which was weil beforethe scandal that led to SenatorHart's "fall from grace" in 1987.

24 JOURNALOF NONVERBALBEHAVIOR psychophysiological measures recorded during exposure and the self-report measures taken after each stimulus excerpt. The probe manipulation was included in this study in order to increase the probability that subjects would bring their attitudes to bear on their immediate reactions to the exo pressive displays, by asking for self-reported affect while subjects were still watching the excerpts. Therefore, subjects in the probe condition were expected to show stronger effects of prior attitude on their facial expressive responses to the politicians' displays. One final difference between this experiment and the previous one is the nature of the expressive displays presented to subjects. Rather than present two types of negative displays (anger/threat and fear/evasion) and one positive display, this experiment included anger/threat displays and two levels of intensity of the happiness/reassurance displays for each politician. This was done in order to explore the extent to which subjects' facial muscle activity reflects the expressive component of an emotional reaction to the expressive displays of another person or simply motor-mimetic responses that have no affective consequence for subjective experience. This is an ever-present inferential problem in studies that use expressive displays as stimuli and observers' facial reactions as indicators of affective responses. On the one hand, facial actions may result from patterned efferent outflow to the expressive system following the elicitation of an emotion and hence may be viewed as a readout of internal stare (barring disp•ay rules, deception, and other factors that might decouple facial expressions from internal stare). On the other hand, facial actions may result from mimicry, which usually refers to situations in which observers' skeletal muscle responses parallel those of a model, without any necessary reference to their effect on internal stares such as subjective feelings or autonornic arousal. Non-affective mechanisms suggested to account for such phe~ nomena have included reflexive motor mimicry (Hoffrnan, 1978, 1984) and communicative intent (Bavelas et al., 1986). However, the question remains open as to whether these mimetic facial actions, in turn, influence subjective stare and autonomic activity. Certain versions of the facial feedback hypothesis postulate that expressive facial actions, regardless of the source of instigation, provide afferent information for the subjective experience of emotion (cf., Laird, 1984; Tourangeau and EIIsworth, 1979). Other versions of the facial feedback hypothesis suggest that only spontaneous facial expressions, such as those due to mimicry, influence subjective and autonomic reactions (cf. Leventhal, 1980, 1984; Tomkins, 1962, 1963, 1981). Support for this latter hypothesis was found in a recent study where mimetic reactions to audience inserts enhanced subiects' amusement while


watching comedy routines (Bush, Barr, McHugo, & Lanzetta, 1989). Therefore, when it comes to the muscles of facial expression, motor mimicry may instantiate affect, which would be consistent with the claims made for the effects on autonomic and subjective measures of posing facial expressions of emotion (e.g., Levenson, Ekman, & Friesen, 1990). By including two levels of happiness/reassurance displays, the correspondence between facial actions (specifically, zygomatic EMG activity) and seif-reported positive emotion can be more fully exarnined. Facial EMG changes were found to be sensitive to both valence and intensity as subjects viewed pleasant and unpleasant slides (Cacioppo, Petty, Losch, & Kim, 1986), and many studies have linked facial muscle actions to reported emotion (e.g., Ekman, Friesen, & Ancoli, 1980, McCanne & Anderson, 1986; McHugo, 1983), but there are no facial EMG data on the effects of the intensity of single types of expressive displays on observers' emotional reactions. If subjects report stronger positive reactions and show more zygomatic EMG activity to intense happiness/reassurance displays than to mild happiness/reassurance displays, then the case will have been made stronger for a positive covariation between facial actions and subjective experience. Alternatively, if there is a decoupling between facial actions and self-reports, then the favored interpretation would be that at least part of the facial responses are driven by motor mimicry that is devoid of affective impact on subjective experience. METHOD

Design The be~een-subjects factors were 1) probe condition, 2) sex of subject, and 3) prior attitude toward the politician. SubjecLs were assi8ned randomly to probe condition (within sex), auitude toward the politicians was determined by post hoc blocking on questionnaire items. Display condition (with replication) and politician were within-subjects factors; each subject viewed ~,o mild happiness/reassurance, ~vo intense happiness/reassurance, and two anger/threat displays by President Ronald Reagan and Senator Gary Hart. Within each Sex X Probe cell, subjects were randomly assigned to one of four display orders, wherein subjects alternately viewed each politician in three-display blocks. Each block contained an anger/threat, a mild happiness/reassurance, and an intense happiness/reassurance display. Anger/ threat displays always occupied the middle position in each three-display block, and the order of mild versus intense happiness/reassurance displays


was reversed in the second block for each politician. Each display order began with an excerpt by each politician that contained rnixed expressions. As a result, each subject viewed fourteen silent expressive displays, seven by each politician. Subiects

Fifty-four female and 46 male undergraduates (between the ages of 17 and 25, M = 18.8), participated in a one-hour session concerning "media and I~litics." Most subjects volunteered in order to receive course credit in Introducto~ Psychology; six subjects were recruited through dormitory solicitation and received ten dollars each. Data for five additional subjects were not used due to equipment or experimenter error. Stimuli

Excerpts were chosen from our videotape archive of the Reagan presidency and of the 1984 presidential primary campaigns. The criteria for selecting facial expressive displays of happiness/reassurance and anger/ threat include static and dynamic cues, such as, head movement and orientation; brow and mouth positions; and gaze direction and fixation (see Masters et al., 1986). For example, during displays of anger/threat, eyelids are open wide, eyebrows are Iowered, the gaze is fixed, and the head is oriented forward from the body in a downward angle. During displays of happiness/reassurance, the eye opening varies, eyebrows are raised (or relaxed), the mouth comers are retracted and raised, the upper or both rows of teeth are showing, and the head is oriented in an upward angle. Camera angle, image size, and background were considered as additional criteria for selecting expressive displays. The twelve expressive excerpts were between 32 and 40 s in duration (M=35.33 s), and each contained two or three individual segments that were edited together. Although the politician was shown talking, the excerpts were presented without the sound, which meant that the verbal message did not influence selection. The two mixed-expression excerpts (39 s), which began each display order, contained mild speech-related expressions, but no sustained expressive displays of emotion. Psychophysiological Measures Facial activity on the left side of the face over the corrugator supercilii (brow), zygomaticus major (cheek), and orbicularis oris (lip) muscle re-

27 GRFGORY J. McHUGO, JOHN T. LANZETTA, AND LAUREN K. BUSH

gions was measured using bipolar placements of Beckman Ag/AgCl electrodes (11 mm) filled with Beckman electrolyte gel. The skin sufface was cleaned with acetone and distilled water and was lightly abraded with a pumice stone; electrode impedances were reduced generally to less than 10 Kohms. Inter-electrode distance was 12 mm, and electrode pairs were referenced to a ground electrode placed on the right side of the subject's forehead near the midline. A Grass Instruments Model 79C polygraph with 7P511F amplifiers was used to record the raw EMG (gain = 10 mv/mm), where the bandwidth was limited (Iow filter = 1 Hz, high filter = 1 kHz) and 60 cycle noise was excluded. The signal was then full-wave rectified and averaged (through contour-following integrators) with a time constant of 100 ms. Skin conductance was measured using a Coulbourn Instruments Skin Conductance Coupler ($71-22) and Beckman miniature Ag/AgCI electrodes, filled with a conducting medium made from .15M NaCl and Unibase ointment, and placed over the medial phalanges of the first and third fingers of the left hand. Heart rate was measured using a photoplethysmographic cuff placed over the distal phalanx of the second finger of the left hand. A Gulf-andWestern Pulse Watch (Model 420) detected each heart beat and provided an analog output in beats per minute. The analog output from each recording device was sampled at a rate of 5 Hz through the A-to-D converter of a New England Digital Able 60 microcomputer. Procedure

Upon arrival subjects read a general information and consent form, which stated that the experiment concerned subjective and bodily reactions to television excerpts showing President Reagan and Senator Hart. After signing the consent form, subjects read a brief paragraph concerning the role of television in contemporary politics. It concluded by saying that we would present television excerpts without the sound because "we are interested in how people respond to the images normally presented on television." This was followed by a written synopsis of the political careers and issue positions of President Reagan and Senator Hart. In addition, in order to reduce subjects' suspicion that facial muscle activity was being measured, they were told that the electrodes would be recording "involuntary neural reactions" to the videotapes. Subjects then completed a questionnaire to assess media habits and opinons, as weil as political ideology and party identification. In addition,

28

IOURNALOF NONVERBALBEHAVIOR subjects indicated which of seven emotions had been evoked in the past by both Reagan and Hart and how characteristic six traits were of each of them (see Abelson et al. (1982) for scale development). Finally, subjects used a seven-point Likert-type scale, from "strongly positive" to "strongly negative," to report their overall attitude toward each politician. After the recording electrodes were attached, the subject was seated in a 3.0 by 2.3 m viewing room, which contained a CRT display next to the subject's chair and a 19-in. color television 2.0 m in front of the subject. The experimental procedures were then reviewed, and it was explained that instructions would appear on the CRT throughout the experiment. An audio intercom was available for experimenter-subject interaction, and the subject was observed by means of a concealed video camera throughout the session, although no permanent record was made. Physiological measures were collected for 15 s preceding the onset of the videotaped excerpt (pretape baseline) and then for the first 30 seconds during presentation (tape period). Subjects in the probe condition were prompted via the CRT at the 30 s point during each excerpt to provide their global affect rating, using the seven-button panel in the right arm of their chair. Following each excerpt, instructions were presented on the CRT for the subjects to report the strength of their reaction (on a seven-point scale frorn "not at all" to "very strongly") in four emotion categories, which were defined by the following triads: 1) joyful, happy, merry; 2) angry, mad, scornful; 3) comforted, warm, reassured; and 4) anxious, fearful, worried. After the last excerpt, the experimenter entered the viewing room and administered the post-exposure questionnaire. Subjects rated Reagan and Hart on a "feeling thermometer" (0°=extremely cold, 100°=extremely warm), as a measure of post-exposure attitude toward each politician. The experimenter questioned the subject about the experiment; only four subjects expressed suspicion regarding the nature of the recordings or the hypotheses. Data Reduction The psychophysiological data were averaged over five-second epochs during acquisition, thereby producing three means per baseline period and six means per tape period per channel, which were converted from A-to-D units to channel-appropriate units using calibration formulae: beats per minute for heart rate, rnicromhos for skin conductance, and microvolts average for facial EMG. Means from epochs in which there had been occurrences of movement artifact, experimenter error, or equipment failure were considered missing values in the statistical analyses.


Because we were interested in relative changes, rather than absolute ones, and to minimize individual differences in tonic levels and lability, single subject arrays were standardized across all trials for each psychophysiological channel. Then, for each trial and each variable, the three baseline values and the six tape period values were averaged and then differenced to represent the response to the expressive display. Finally, the change scores for each trial were averaged over the two repetitions of each display type for each politician; likewise, the self-report scales were averaged over repetitions.

RESULTS

Analysis of the pre-exposure questionnaire revealed that the sample was balanced in terms of political party identification (42% Republican, 17% Independent, 41% Democrat) and political ideology (41% Conservative, 15% Moderate, 44% Liberal). Sex of subject was not correlated with preexposure or post-exposure attitude toward either politician (r's < .12), themby indicating the relative independence of these two factors in the experimental design. Pre-exposure attitudes toward Reagan and Hart were inversely, but not strongly, correlated, owing in part to the large number of neutral attitudes toward Hart. For this reason, and because many display and contextual differences could not be controlled, emotional responses to Reagan and Hart were analyzed separately. Prior attitude toward Reagan was reduced from the pre-exposure seven-point scale to a dichotomy, resulting in 40 opponents and 51 supporters (nine individuals with a neutral attitude were excluded). An analysis to examine the effects of probe, sex, prior attitude, and display on emotional responses to Reagan was conducted first, and it revealed no significant effects of probe condition on either psychophysiological or self-reported reactions. Therefore, the analyses reported below excluded the Probe factor.

Self-Reported Reactions to Reagan's Displays Repeated-measures MANOVAs, treating prior attitude toward Reagan and sex of subject as be~ween-subjects factors and display type as a withinsubject factor, revealed that there were highly significant main effects of display condition on all four self-report scales (all p's < .0001). Univariate contrasts for the joy and comfort scales indicated significant differences between each display condition, wi~,ereas the negative emotions (anger

30 JOURNAL OF NONVERBAL BEHAVIOR

Joyful - H a p p y - Merry 4 .

--

»»»:,»»»

i

Oovonents porters

::-:+::.:.:

Reported Intensity

-:_:::+:+:+:.: :+:c-.«---':~:,:t:~:,:,[. ::_:=_+.+_:.:

+~£+-~4+,7:

:~~:-.-_-:

:

.+ .+. . . . +:-:+:.:+--

Intense rlild Happmess! Hap)/~essl A.n~erlThz~a! Reas$urance Reassurance

Reported Intensity

2

0 I ntense N|ld Happxne~81 Happinessl

AngerITh~at

ReLq.sl_--~nce R e a s $ ~ e

FIGURE 1 Mean self-reports of joy and anxiety for supporters and opponents following exposure to Reagan's expressive displays. The scale range was from O, "not at all," to 6, "very strongly."


1.0

Zygomatie (Cheek) Opponents Supporters

0.5

Phasic Amplitude

-0.5

High Happiness/ Reassurance

Lov Happiness/ Reassurance

AagerlThreat

Corrup.tor (Brow) 1.0

0.5

Phasic

Amplitude

0

-0.5 High Happiness/ ReonsKl~nce

Low Ha~l)i]~ess/ Reusunmce

A~erlTlu~at

FIGURE 2

Facial EMG responses for supporters and opponents while viewing Reagan's expressive displays. Responses are plotted as mean change from baseline and are based on within-subject standardized data.


and anxiety) only differentiated happiness/reassurance from angerlthreat displays. As expected, subjects reported positive feelings following happinesslreassurance displays and negative feelings following angerlthreat displays. There were also main effects for prior attitude for self-reports of joy, comfort, and anger (all p's < 0.02). Overall, Reagan's supporters reported more positive and less negative emotion following his displays than did opponents. However, these main effects were qualified by significant Attitude X Display interactions for self-reports of joy, F(2,86)=4.12; comfort, F(2,86)=5.44; and anxiety, F(2,86)=4.52 (all p's < 0.03). Figure I shows that Reagan's supporters reported more joy than opponents following his happinesslreassurance displays, but they reported similarly low levels of joy following his anger threat displays; the same pattern occurred for selfreports of comfort. Figure I also shows that Reagan's supporters reported more anxiety than opponents following his angerlthreat displays, but less anxiety following his happinesslreassurance displays.

Physiological Responses during Reagan's Displays Main effects for display condition were significant for both corrugator and zygomatic EMG (p's