Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39030391›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

The N400 effect captures nuances in implicit political preferences.

Emmanuel Mahieux, Lee de-Wit, Leun J Otten, Joseph T Devlin, Nicole Y Y Wicha

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Emmanuel MahieuxDepartment of Experimental Psychology, University College London, London, UK. emmanuel.mahieux.19@ucl.ac.uk.
Lee de-WitDepartment of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Leun J OttenInstitute of Cognitive Neuroscience, University College London, London, UK.
Joseph T DevlinDepartment of Experimental Psychology, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9737-3070
Nicole Y Y WichaDepartment of Neuroscience, Developmental and Regenerative Biology, University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We conducted a study in San Antonio, Texas, in the weeks preceding the 2022 state Governor election to determine if implicit or explicit measures of political preference could predict voter behavior. We adapted an established event-related potential (ERP) paradigm showing political statements to participants one word at the time where the last word made the statement pro-Republican or pro-Democratic. Our sample of college students included decided and undecided voters, and was reflective of the demographic make-up of south-central Texas. Our implicit measures were an established authoritarianism scale and the N400 effect to the sentence-final word. The N400 is an ERP to any stimulus that engages semantic memory and has been shown to measure implicit disagreement with political statements. Explicit measures of political preference and authoritarianism were predictive of vote choice. The expected N400 effect was found for Democratic voters, with larger amplitude to pro-Republican than pro-Democratic statements. Surprisingly, decided Republican voters showed no difference in N400 responses to pro-Republican and pro-Democratic statements and there was no group difference in the N400 effect. In turn, the N400 was not predictive of voter behavior. We argue that the N400 effect reflected individual political preferences, but that ultimately voter behavior aligned with partisan identity.

Indexed as

Evoked PotentialsPoliticsAdolescentAdultAuthoritarianismElectroencephalographyFemaleHumansMaleTexasYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID39030391
PMCPMC11271581

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.