Study Finds Emotions Don't Determine Views on Democracy

Research suggests democratic legitimacy rests more on policy delivery than emotional reactions to election wins and losses.

Apr. 1, 2026 at 12:23am

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A new study from the University of Georgia suggests that emotions alone do not determine whether people are satisfied with democracy. The research team found that while winning and losing can trigger strong emotional reactions, these shifts do not translate into changes in how people feel about the state of democracy. The findings indicate that democracy's strength depends more on real policy results and fulfilled expectations from policymakers rather than short-lived emotional responses.

Why it matters

This research offers important insights into the factors that shape public perceptions of democracy. It suggests that efforts to inflame emotions or vilify political opponents are unlikely to strengthen support for democratic institutions, and may instead deepen political disaffection. Instead, the study emphasizes the importance of policymakers delivering on their promises in order to sustain confidence in the democratic process, even among those who did not support the winning side.

The details

The study used creative approaches to isolate the impact of emotions on democratic attitudes, looking at reactions to events like the Super Bowl, the World Cup, and scenes from the movie 'The Lion King.' The researchers found that while these events triggered strong emotional responses, they did not lead to meaningful changes in how people felt about the state of democracy. This suggests that the 'winner-loser gap' in politics, where election winners tend to be more satisfied with democracy than losers, is driven more by policy expectations than simple emotional reactions.

  • The study was conducted in 2022, using data from the Super Bowl and World Cup that year.
  • The controlled experiment using clips from 'The Lion King' was also conducted in 2022.

The players

Shane P. Singh

The lead author of the study and the Joshua W. Jones Professor of Public and International Affairs in the UGA School of Public and International Affairs.

Patrick Fournier

A co-author of the study.

Jason Roy

A co-author of the study.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“If you really want to build durable democratic support, turn down the temperature and focus on policy.”

— Shane P. Singh, Lead author of the study

“Democracy is cyclical. You win some; you lose some. Losing doesn't mean the system has failed. It means there will be another chance in the future.”

— Shane P. Singh, Lead author of the study

What’s next

The researchers plan to further explore how policymakers can best deliver on their promises to sustain public confidence in democracy, even among those who did not support the winning side.

The takeaway

This study challenges the notion that emotions alone drive public perceptions of democracy. Instead, it suggests that delivering on policy promises is key to maintaining democratic legitimacy, even in the face of electoral losses. The findings underscore the importance of policymakers focusing on substantive outcomes rather than inflammatory rhetoric.