Examining the relationship between politics and psychology
Political psychologists combine disciplines
In the run-up to the presidential election in November, the interdisciplinary field of political psychology, a combination of economics, history, international relations, political science, sociology, psychology, and other disciplines, offers a means of examining behaviors and political values and beliefs.
Psychologists from these various disciplines treat clients and conduct research that contribute to the field of political psychology in different ways.
Rose McDermott, Ph.D, researches the importance of psychology as it relates to our understanding of global politics. McDermott is the director of postdoctoral programs and a professor of international relations at Brown University.
In her book, “Political Psychology in International Relations (Analytical Perspectives On Politics),” she explores the claims that politics is driven by personality, citing Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, Kim Chong-Il, and Ayatollah Khameinei as individuals whose need for recognition purportedly drives their behavior.
More recently, McDermott has been studying the relationship between political psychology and international relations with a focus on gender. She cited the importance of psychology as a way to understand global politics. Her research looks at the cultures in 22 different countries and examines how they endorse various theories and the fundamental psychological aspects that inform ideas.
According to McDermott, political psychology within the scope of political science has two distinct strains. American political psychology looks at voting and mass psychological attitudes, while international political psychology focuses on leaders, she noted.
In this country, multiple issues involving the LGBTQ+ community have been used to gain political credence for politicians, according to Aliya Webermann, Ph.D., private practitioner focused on trauma-informed therapy in the LGBTQ+ population. She reported that fear and misunderstanding have become talking points for politicians.
The clients with whom Webermann works report having had shared experiences of discrimination, challenges, and hardships. Her clients have been victims of socio-political and socio-cultural restrictions.
“Many are experiencing rejection or expect to experience it.” This “toxic exposure,” whether through overt or covert actions, is omnipresent and often internalized and individuals may not realize the negative impact it can have, she added.
Some of Webermann’s clients have also experienced “institutional betrayal” where leaders have failed to protect them from harm. “We have a sense that politicians won’t save us,” she said. “We have to save ourselves.”
Webermann added that in recent years, there has been gradual societal acceptance of lesbians and gays, but that same sentiment does not necessarily apply to transgender individuals. “There should be political momentum behind things that affect us,” she said.
Jyothi Vayalakkara, Psy.D, is a practitioner at NE Psych & Neuropsych Associates, LLC, in Rocky Hill, CT.
With a firm belief that the only way to initiate change is to become involved, Jyothi Vayalakkara, Psy.D, practitioner at NE Psych & Neuropsych Associates, LLC, in Rocky Hill, CT, intends to enter politics sometime in the next five to 10 years. She said her platform will focus on human rights, particularly for vulnerable populations including women, children, minorities, and the LGBTQ+ community.
Vayalakkara’s work extends to serving as supervising psychologist with the state of Connecticut, and as a member of the advisory board of the Office of Multicultural Health Equity (OMHE).
For the last five years, Vayalakkara has provided DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) training in the belief that she is able to be more effective in her human rights, equality, and justice mission.
She said DEI sets the stage for building up society for people who don’t have access to opportunity or who don’t feel equal to their peers. In response to recent pushback to this initiative in some schools and workplaces, she emphasized she is “…not disenfranchised” but that “…resistance has added fuel for me to talk more about this topic.” She said, “If there is more resistance, then something’s working.”
The capacity to discriminate and biases that build up throughout a lifetime have set the stage for some of the marginalization that has occurred in recent years. “We have to preserve our societal structure,” Vayalakkara added. “We have more work to do. In this environment, racial inequity and discrimination is rampant. At the end of the day, being a good human being goes a long way. It’s as simple as that.”
Vayalakkara said that reaching across the aisle is the only way to have long-term solutions. “Some think their voice is not valuable. You don’t tell a group that their voice doesn’t matter. How can we try to meet in the middle? You need to work with people, especially those we don’t see eye-to-eye with,” she said.
While political psychology is important, McDermott noted a lack of interest in this discipline. One of the challenges in promoting the field is that there is no “core” in political psychology, she said. “It’s difficult to establish a coherent core because [the field] is all over the map – racism, sexism, behavior. There are no basic findings.”
McDermott added that political psychology is influenced by the theory: “Let one thousand flowers bloom.” She said, “We can all be ourselves. This comes out of the humanistic movement of the Vietnam era. We are a million people doing a million things joined by a desire to improve the world in a social justice way.”
As the country moves closer to the election, political ads continue to inundate television, print, and social media outlets. Jennifer M. Doran, Ph.D., past president, Connecticut Psychological Association, and assistant professor, Yale School of Medicine, emphasized the negative impact the onslaught of political news has on mental health. She said there is a linear connection between mood and mental health that is being promoted in a divisive, hostile, and toxic framework.
Research shows that people tend to spend time with those who confirm what we think, but that does not solve the problem, according to Doran. The country is divided by social identity – us versus them in what she calls political “partisanism.” “This is what the narrative has become. It’s an awful characterization,” said Doran. “As a society, we have to be able to disagree and have constructive conversations. We can find common ground.”