Technology Impact in Modern Political Communications: Psychological Grounds
https://doi.org/10.26794/2226-7867-2021-11-3-59-65
Abstract
The author writes about the manipulative technologies used in political communications and an attempt to interpret through the prism of psychological and anthropological concepts (cognitive psychology, evolutionary psychology). The article discusses such political technologies as “Wait Zone”, “Victimisational Snow”, “semantic differentiation”, “Fear trade”, “false theatricalisation”, “red herring”, and “Creating a victim”. Political technologists analyse them quite superficially, not trying to understand the deep psychological foundations of their effectiveness, so an attempt is made to understand this issue with support for social, cognitive, and evolutionary psychology. The author does not claim that his explanations will be exhaustive, but it suggests that they can shed light on the particular effectiveness of media exchange techniques. This issue is particularly relevant in connection with the thesis of many specialists that humanity has entered a new media manipulation era — The post-truth era. It seems that this determines the special relevance of this article.
About the Author
S. V. Lebedev
Political consultant
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Sergey V. Lebedev - Cand. Sci. (Political Sciences)
Moscow
References
1. Aronson E., Wilson T., Aikert R. Social psychology. Psychological laws of human behaviour in society. St. Petersburg: Prime-Evroznak; 2002. (In Russ.).
2. Solovey V. D. Absolute weapon. Basics of psychological war and media exchange. Moscow: Eksmo; 2017. (In Russ.).
3. Joye Y., Poels K. & Willems K. “Evolutionary Store Atmospherics” — Designing with Evolution in Mind. URL: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978–3–540–92784–6_11.
4. Shomova S. A. From Mystery to Street Art. Essays on archetypes of culture in political communication. Moscow: Higher School of Economics; 2018. (In Russ.).
5. Travers M., Van Boven L., & Judd C. The Secrecy Heuristic: Inferring Quality from Secrecy in Foreign Policy Contexts. Political Psychology. 2014;35(1):97–111.
6. Mikhalskaya A. Russian Socrates. Lectures on comparative historical rhetoric. Moscow: Academy; 1996. (In Russ.).
7. Tajfel H. Human groups and social categories. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press; 1981.
8. Yanagizawa-Drott D. Propaganda and Conflict: Evidence from the Rwandan Genocide. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 2014;129(4):1947–1994. URL: https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qju020.
9. Iyengar Peters, Mark D. Peters, Donald R. Kinder. Experimental Demonstrations of the “Not-So-Minimal” Consequences of Television News Programs. The American Political Science Review. 1982;76(4):848–858.
10. Becker E. The Denial of Death. Free Press; 1973.
11. Solomon S., Greenberg J., Pyszczynski T. A terror management theory of social behaviour: The psychological functions of self-esteem and cultural worldviews. Advances in experimental social psychology. 1991;(24):93–159.
12. Freud Z. Totem and taboo. Moscow: Azbuka; 2012. (In Russ.).
13. Andreeva G. M. Social Psychology. Mocow: Aspect Press; 2010. (In Russ.).
14. Konopleva T. V. Psychology of information perception: the perception of news about the world of politicians in media space. Psychologist. 2013;(5):11–23. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.7256/2306–0425.2013.5.9247
15. Tsuladze A. Political mythology. Moscow: ESCMO; 2003. (In Russ.).
16. Moss M. Sketch about the gift. Societies. Exchange. Personality: Works on social anthropology. Moscow: Eastern Literature, RAS; 1996. (In Russ.).
17. Zahavi A. The cost of honesty (further remarks on the handicap principle). Journal of Theoretical Biology. 1977;67(3):603–605.
Review
For citations:
Lebedev S.V. Technology Impact in Modern Political Communications: Psychological Grounds. Humanities and Social Sciences. Bulletin of the Financial University. 2021;11(4):59-65. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.26794/2226-7867-2021-11-3-59-65
Views:
493
Email this article 