Adena, Maja; Huck, S e en
A icle — Published Ve sion
Suppo o a igh -wing populis pa y and subjec i e
well-being: Expe imen al and su ey e idence om
Ge many
PLOS ONE
P o ided in Coope a ion wi h:
WZB Be lin Social Science Cen e
Sugges ed Ci a ion: Adena, Maja; Huck, S e en (2024) : Suppo o a igh -wing populis pa y
and subjec i e well-being: Expe imen al and su ey e idence om Ge many, PLOS ONE, ISSN
1932-6203, Public Lib a y o Science, San F ancisco, CA, Vol. 19, Iss. 6, pp. 1-16,
h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0303133
This Ve sion is a ailable a :
h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/311283
S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen
Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den.
Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle
Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich
machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen.
So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen
(insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en,
gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do
genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e.
Te ms o use:
Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal
and schola ly pu poses.
You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o
exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he
in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public.
I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en
Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise
u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence.
h p://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Suppo o a igh -wing populis pa y and
subjec i e well-being: Expe imen al and
su ey e idence om Ge many
Maja AdenaID
1☯
*, S e en Huck
1,2☯
1Resea ch Uni Economics o Change, WZB Be lin, Be lin, Ge many, 2Depa men o Economics, UCL
London, London, Uni ed Kingdom
☯These au ho s con ibu ed equally o his wo k.
*[email protected]
Abs ac
Wi h he ise o populism in many coun ies, including Ge many, i is mo e impo an han
e e o be e unde s and he causes and consequences o populis suppo . Using wo
expe imen s wi hin he con ex o a la ge panel su ey, we s udy how suppo o he Ge -
man igh -wing populis pa y Al e na i e u
¨ Deu schland (A D) is associa ed wi h subjec i e
pe cep ions o pe sonal and inancial well-being. In bo h expe imen s, we ely on p iming he
iden i y o A D suppo e s, once in a con olled manne and once in a na u al se ing. We
documen a causal ela ionship om A D suppo o diminished well-being o new and ma -
ginal A D suppo e s. Ou indings challenge he p e ailing assump ion ha causali y mo es
unidi ec ionally, om li e dissa is ac ion o suppo o populis pa ies, and sugges ha
ea ly in e en ions ocusing on posi i e messages a e pa icula ly p omising o win o e s
back in o he mains eam.
In oduc ion
Wi h he su ge o populism in a ious coun ies, including Ge many, i is now mo e c ucial
han e e o gain a be e unde s anding o he causes and consequences o populis suppo .
A he beginning o 2024, he igh -wing populis pa y Al e na i e ü Deu schland, A D, su -
passed 20% in na ional Ge man polls [1,2]. Rema kably, in all Eas Ge man s a es excep Be -
lin, i became he s onges pa y [3].
Wha do o e s expe ience when hey u n o a pa y such as he A D? This is an impo an
ques ion as any change in he emo ional s a es o o e s who u n o an ex emis populis
pa y migh ha e epe cussions o how o op imally de end libe al democ acy. Is i a su ge o
happiness ha o e s expe ience by inally aking a s ance agains he mains eam? The e is a
la ge body o li e a u e sugges ing ha his migh be he case. Taking a s ance goes along wi h
es ablishing a sense o sel -de e mina ion and agency, which a e seen as impo an o well-
being (see, o example, [4] o [5], who build on sel -de e mina ion heo y). I may also educe
cogni i e dissonance [6] and induce a sense o achie emen h ough emb acing a goal, which
has also been shown o boos happiness (see, o example, [7] o [8]). Finally, aking a s ance
PLOS ONE
PLOS ONE | h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0303133 June 26, 2024 1 / 16
a1111111111
a1111111111
a1111111111
a1111111111
a1111111111
OPEN ACCESS
Ci a ion: Adena M, Huck S (2024) Suppo o a
igh -wing populis pa y and subjec i e well-being:
Expe imen al and su ey e idence om Ge many.
PLoS ONE 19(6): e0303133. h ps://doi.o g/
10.1371/jou nal.pone.0303133
Edi o : Holge A. Rau, Geo g-Augus -Uni e si a¨
Go¨ ingen: Geo g-Augus -Uni e si a Go ingen,
GERMANY
Recei ed: No embe 21, 2022
Accep ed: Ap il 20, 2024
Published: June 26, 2024
Copy igh : ©2024 Adena, Huck. This is an open
access a icle dis ibu ed unde he e ms o he
C ea i e Commons A ibu ion License, which
pe mi s un es ic ed use, dis ibu ion, and
ep oduc ion in any medium, p o ided he o iginal
au ho and sou ce a e c edi ed.
Da a A ailabili y S a emen : Da a A ailabili y
S a emen : All ele an da a a e a ailable om
GESIS a DOI: h ps://doi.o g/10.7802/2714.
Funding: MA g a e ully acknowledges inancial
suppo by Deu sche Fo schungsgemeinscha
(DFG, h ps://www.d g.de/) h ough collabo a i e
esea ch cen e CRC TRR 190 (p ojec numbe
280092119). The unde s had no ole in s udy
design, da a collec ion and analysis, decision o
publish, o p epa a ion o he manusc ip .
can se e as a success ul s a egy o coping wi h s ess and inc ease well-being h ough s ess
alle ia ion [9,10].
Bu he e a e also easons o belie e ha o e s migh expe ience de e io a ions in well-
being when hey swea allegiance o a populis pa y such as he A D. Righ -wing mo emen s
h i e on a he o ic o nega i i y, swamping hei suppo e s wi h nega i ely amed opics
and news [11–14]. Also, igh -wing populis communica ion s a egies s ongly ely on nega-
i e emo ions [15] and ea [16], and populis messages a e o en cha ac e ized by assigning
blame o eli es in an emo ionalized way [17]. Such nega i e messages a e likely o “in ec ”
ecipien s h ough emo ional con agion, a phenomenon well es ablished in he li e a u e [18,
19] ha has nega i e epe cussions o well-being. Fo example, exposu e o especially nega i e
news on TV has been shown o ha e an ad e se e ec on iewe s’ men al well-being, igge ing
anxie y and sadness [20,21], and he epo ing o mass iolence has been shown o induce sig-
ni ican dis ess [22]. E en wi h sho exposu e o news on he 9/11 a acks, indi iduals
epo ed nega i e emo ions, such as shock, ea , and ange [23–25], while as an e ec o long
exposu e, people became mo e anxious and emo ional [26–28] and epo ed highe le els o
pos auma ic s ess diso de symp oms [29]. In a simila ein, ecen s udies ela ing o
COVID-19 ha e shown ha exposu e o nega i e news abou he pandemic igge ed dep es-
sion symp oms [30], inc eased sel - epo ed men al dis ess [31], and was co ela ed wi h
mo e se e e sel - epo ed men al heal h symp oms [32] and educ ions in posi i e a ec and
op imism [33]. On he o he hand, news s o ies ea u ing o he s’ kindness ha e been shown o
ha e he po en ial o undo he a e si e e ec s o nega i e news [34]. In he pa y con ex ,
which we s udy he e, nega i e populis appeals ha e been shown o igge nega i e emo ions
in hei suppo e s [35]. We summa ize he wo po en ial pa hs by which he decision o sup-
po he A D can a ec indi idual well-being in Fig 1.
Ha ing good easons o expec ing e ec s in ei he di ec ion, we emba k on p o iding
causal e idence o he consequences o suppo o a igh -wing pa y on well-being. Unde -
s anding he psychological consequences o such a choice is impo an o a leas wo easons:
They may in o m he con en and iming o in e en ions designed o win o e s back in o he
mains eam. I o e s expe ience su ges o happiness when joining he populis s’ anks, p om-
ising in e en ions will ul ima ely ha e o ackle he opics championed by he populis s and
will ha e o wai un il ini ial su ges in well-being ebb. In con as , i o e s expe ience a de e i-
o a ion in well-being, e ec i e in e en ions will emb ace di e en opics no laden wi h he
same nega i i y and will be swi .
We examine he consequences o suppo ing a igh -wing populis pa y on well-being, u i-
lizing wo expe imen s in he con ex o a panel su ey in Ge many. Bo h expe imen s ely on
iden i y p iming, bu hey di e in he way he p iming a ises. In one expe imen , he p iming
is ully con olled h ough a module wi hin he su ey; in he o he , we exploi na u ally occu -
ing di e ences in exposu e o news abou he A D o e ime. Bo h expe imen s exhibi he
same obus pa e n: Vo e s wi h a new and no -ye - ully- o med iden i y as A D suppo e s
who a e eminded o hei allegiance o he A D epo diminished well-being. The e ec is
weake (in he con olled expe imen ) o e e sed (in he na u al expe imen ) o o he A D
suppo e s. This sugges s ha i is he ini ial decision o suppo a igh -wing pa y ha has he
mos p o ound nega i e e ec on well-being.
Ma e ials and me hods
Da a
We collec ed da a om ou wa es o a su ey ga he ed o us by YouGo Ge many in 2019,
2020, and wice in 2021—be o e and a e he ede al elec ions. In wa e 1, in Decembe 2019,
PLOS ONE
Suppo o a igh -wing populis pa y and subjec i e well-being
PLOS ONE | h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0303133 June 26, 2024 2 / 16
Compe ing in e es s: The au ho s ha e decla ed
ha no compe ing in e es s exis .
we sampled 5,078 esponden s. These we e composed o a ep esen a i e sample o Ge man
o e s consis ing o 4,094 esponden s, o which we added 984 addi ional andomly d awn
A D suppo e s based on sel - epo ed o ing in he 2017 ede al elec ions eco ded by You-
Go . This gene a ed a o al o 1,397 o e s who o ed o he A D in 2017. We o e sampled
A D o e s in o de o inc ease he powe o es s ha compa e A D suppo e s wi h nonsup-
po e s and o inc ease he numbe o hose esponden s who swi ched pa y allegiance. In
wa e 2, in No embe /Decembe 2020 we e-con ac ed all esponden s om 2019 and ecei ed
esponses om 3,864 pa icipan s, o 76% o he ull 2019 sample. In his wa e, we exploi he
ac ha he A D ede al pa y con en ion ook place on No embe 28–29, 2020, igh in he
middle o ou sampling window (No embe 23–Decembe 14, 2020). This u nishes us wi h a
na u al expe imen , on which mo e de ails will ollow below. In wa e 3, om he end o
Augus un il a ew days be o e he ede al elec ions held on Sep embe 26, 2021, we e-in i ed
all p e ious pa icipan s, o whom 3,359 ook pa again, and we added a new esh sample,
consis ing o 1,451 2017 A D o e s and 251 non-A D o e s, gene a ing a o al o 5,061 pa ic-
ipan s. In wa e 4, in No embe /Decembe 2021, we in i ed all pa icipan s om he h ee
Fig 1. Two po en ial pa hs by which he decision o suppo he A D can a ec indi idual well-being.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0303133.g001
PLOS ONE
Suppo o a igh -wing populis pa y and subjec i e well-being
PLOS ONE | h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0303133 June 26, 2024 3 / 16
p e ious wa es and achie ed a esponse a e o 86%, gene a ing a o al o 4,342 pa icipan s.
This wa e con ained an expe imen al module, which is explained below in mo e de ail.
A WZB Resea ch E hics Re iew (2021/0/130) has been ob ained o he expe imen al pa
o he s udy. Da a collec ion was done by YouGo . YouGo ob ained in o med consen in
w i en o m when he pa icipan s egis e ed wi h he pla o m. Due o he collec ion o
answe s pe aining o ques ions abou poli ical o ien a ion and heal h, YouGo ob ained addi-
ional w i en consen in each wa e o he su ey, and he pa icipan s always had he op ion
o wi hd aw om he su ey o skip sensi i e ques ions.
A D suppo measu emen . We collec ed in o ma ion on e ospec i e o ing beha io
in he pa liamen a y elec ions in 2017 and 2021 and on o ing in en ions using he s anda d
ques ion: “I he ede al elec ions we e nex Sunday, which pa y would you o e o ?” This
allows us o dis inguish be ween new and p e ious A D o e s. As answe s ela ed o A D sup-
po migh be a ec ed by expe imen al condi ions, we de ine ou a ge g oups o he con-
olled expe imen (new e sus o he A D suppo e s) on he basis o esponses in he p e ious
wa e. In he con olled expe imen , we exploi a ques ion om he p e ious wa e ha asked
abou pa icipan s’ o ing in en ions in he upcoming pa liamen a y elec ions and asked when
pa icipan s made hei decision. We classi y hose who indica ed in en ions o o e o he
A D and s a ed ha hey did no make his choice a long ime ago as new A D o e s. In he
na u al expe imen , we do no ha e a simila ques ion om he p e ious wa e bu exploi he
p e ious wa e’s ques ions abou he ex en o suppo o he A D pa y mani es o, classi ying
hose wi h limi ed suppo o he mani es o as ma ginal A D o e s, who we hen compa e o
o he A D o e s.
Well-being measu emen . The li e a u e on populism has ended o ocus on measu es o
income o subjec i e measu es o pe sonal dissa is ac ion a an absolu e le el ( h ough elici ed
ag eemen wi h s a emen s such as “my li e is close o ideal” o “I am sa is ied wi h my li e”) o
h ough explici compa isons wi h o he s. We ins ead measu e well-being by ocusing on
in e nal change, asking esponden s o compa e hei cu en si ua ion wi h he p e ious yea
o o measu e hei expec a ions o he u u e compa ed wi h he p esen . We made his
choice ollowing p e ious esea ch ha has shown ha e e ence poin s a e use ul in inc eas-
ing in o ma i eness [36,37]. Wi hou explici ly p o iding e e ence poin s, indi iduals migh
d aw on e e ence poin s ha a e unknown o he esea che , making compa isons di icul
and in oducing noise. Fu he mo e, p io esea ch has shown ha people make in ape sonal
compa isons mo e o en han in e pe sonal ones and ha hey conside he o me o be mo e
impo an [38]. In addi ion, Ge many is a no able excep ion wi h espec o he “lose s o glob-
aliza ion” heo y [39]: o he Ge man A D, he e is b oad ag eemen in he li e a u e (which
elies on in e pe sonal compa isons) ha nei he a iables ela ed o low socio-economic s a-
us, such as educa ion, income, occupa ional p es ige, o unemploymen , no subjec i e pe -
cep ions o one’s ad e se pe sonal (economic) si ua ion a e ela ed o A D suppo [40–45].
An excep ion is Pes hy e al. [46], who, howe e , in e es ingly ask esponden s abou hei
“cu en ” economic si ua ion, hus also encou aging an in ape sonal compa ison. We conjec-
u ed ha measu emen s elying on in e pe sonal compa isons may no cap u e eelings o
mise y ha canno be jus i ied by objec i e compa isons wi h o he s and ha his may plausi-
bly change when we ask abou pu ely in e nal compa isons.
Mo e speci ically, in wa es 2 o 4, we asked pa icipan s abou hei pe sonal well-being and
abou hei inancial well-being compa ed o he p e ious yea as well as abou he ou look o
he coming yea (“When you hink abou he pas yea , how a e you oday pe sonally [ inan-
cially]? Be e han in he pas yea ; as well as in he pas yea ; wo se han in he pas yea ” and
“When you hink abou he coming yea , how do you es ima e you will be doing pe sonally
[ inancially] in compa ison o oday? Be e han oday; he same as oday; wo se han
PLOS ONE
Suppo o a igh -wing populis pa y and subjec i e well-being
PLOS ONE | h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0303133 June 26, 2024 4 / 16
oday.”). Based on hei esponses, we c ea ed dummy a iables indica ing whe he pa ici-
pan s judge hei si ua ion o be wo se han in he yea be o e o expec i o ge wo se in he
nex yea . The a e age o hose ou a iables is ou main indica o o well-being.
O he a iables
We also collec ed da a on gene al poli ical a i udes, place o esidency, socio-economic s a us,
including household size and income, and inancial well-being, and we use hem as con ol
a iables. Table A1 in he S1 File p o ides some summa y s a is ics by wa e.
Analysis
Iden i y p iming and subjec i e well-being— he con olled su ey
expe imen
We implemen ed a su ey expe imen p iming poli ical iden i y in wa e 4 o ou su ey. To
assign he pa icipan s o a pa icula pa y p iming module, we asked which pa y hey o ed
o in he pa liamen a y elec ions o 2021, which pa y hey could imagine suppo ing, and
which pa y p og am hey pa ly o ully suppo . Those who had o ed o he A D, who
could imagine o ing o he A D, o who suppo he A D pa y p og am ully o pa ly we e
p imed wi h hei A D iden i y. Hence, we do no jus de ine A D suppo e s as pas o e s bu
also as indi iduals who suppo he pa y and could imagine o ing o he A D. The emain-
ing indi iduals we e p imed wi h ques ions on he pa y hey indica ed ha ing o ed o in
2021.
In he p iming module, pa icipan s we e o ced o hink deeply abou he pa y hey now
suppo . Mo e speci ically, pa icipan s we e p esen ed wi h se en key mani es o i ems and
asked o which ex en hey ag eed wi h hose. They we e also p esen ed wi h names o h ee
key pa y poli icians and we e asked how good hey ind hei wo k and whe he hey wished
hey had mo e in luence. In addi ion, hey we e asked o speci y u he easons o hei sup-
po o he espec i e pa y in an open ex ield. The exac o mula ion o hose ques ions
( ansla ed in o English) and basic summa y s a is ics can be ound in he Sec ion B in S1 File.
Impo an ly, hal o he esponden s ecei ed his module be o e he well-being sec ion,
while he o he hal ecei ed hese ques ions a e wa ds.
Among he esponden s who ecei ed he ques ions pe aining o he A D, he e was close
o 100% suppo o bo de con ols and he depo a ion o e ugees who ha e commi ed
c imes as well as o he in oduc ion o e e endums in Ge many acco ding o he Swiss
model. The o he p og am poin s ecei ed suppo o 76–79%, wi h he excep ion o he p o-
posed COVID-19 policy, which in ol ed abandoning all measu es comple ely; his a ac ed
mo e limi ed suppo o 60%. The emaining esponden s ecei ed he same ype o ques ions
bu pe aining o he pa ies hey o ed o . The ad an age o his app oach is ha we ha e ull
con ol o e who is ea ed and who is no and who is p imed wi h A D opics e sus ano he
pa y’s opics.
Fo he pu pose o he analysis, among he indi iduals p imed wi h he A D, we dis inguish
be ween new and o he A D pa y suppo e s. As he dis inc ion be ween new and o he A D
pa y suppo e s could po en ially be in luenced by he o de in which he ques ions in wa e 4
we e asked, we ely on wa e-3 esponses o classi y indi iduals. Among indi iduals p imed
wi h A D opics, we de ine a new A D suppo e as somebody who s a ed in wa e 3 ha hey
we e going o o e o he A D in he upcoming pa liamen a y elec ions bu ha hey had no
made his decision long ago. The e a e 252 indi iduals ha ul ill hese c i e ia (and o whom
baseline cha ac e is ics a e a ailable). The emaining indi iduals, who ecei ed he p iming
PLOS ONE
Suppo o a igh -wing populis pa y and subjec i e well-being
PLOS ONE | h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0303133 June 26, 2024 5 / 16
module, a e classi ied as o he A D suppo e s. The e a e 1,471 indi iduals in his ca ego y.
The emaining indi iduals— hose who we e no p imed wi h A D opics—a e classi ied as
nonsuppo e s. This g oup consis s o 2,297 indi iduals.
We c ea ed a “p iming” dummy equal o one o pa icipan s who we e con on ed wi h
he p iming block on poli ics be o e he block on well-being. We also c ea ed a “no p iming”
dummy o pa icipan s who we e con on ed wi h he block on wellbeing be o e he block on
poli ics. As o he measu e o well-being, we c ea ed a a iable indica ing a e age well-being
(highe alues co espond o lowe well-being), which is calcula ed as he a e age o nonmiss-
ing alues o all ou main well-being ques ions.
We hypo hesize ha he well-being o A D suppo e s will ei he be posi i ely o nega i ely
a ec ed when hey a e con on ed wi h A D opics and ha new suppo e s will be a ec ed
mos . The i s pa o he hypo hesis builds on he li e a u e p esen ed abo e. Taking a s ance
could a ec well-being posi i ely, o populis he o ic cen e ed a ound nega i e emo ions
could esul in emo ional con agion. The second pa o he hypo hesis builds on indings in
Hamelee s e al. [17], who ind ha emo ionalized blame a ibu ions in he con ex o populis
communica ion show he s onges pe suasi eness o ci izens wi h weake iden i ies. I is also
in line wi h Cohen [47], who ind ha pa icipan s wi h weake pa y iden i ica ion end o be
mo e in luenced by pa y p iming manipula ions.
In o de o be e s uc u e he upcoming analysis, we o mula e he ollowing es able null
hypo heses:
H1: The e is no p iming e ec o new A D suppo e s.
H2: The p iming e ec o new A D suppo e s is no di e en om he e ec o o he A D
suppo e s.
H3: The p iming e ec o new A D suppo e s is no di e en om he e ec o suppo e s
o o he pa ies.
H4: The e is no o e all p iming e ec .
We p esen ou esul s in Table 1 (Column I) and isualize hem in Fig 2 (le panel, Col-
umn II; he igh panel o he Figu e p esen s he esul s om he na u al expe imen , which
will be explained in he nex sec ion). Mo e speci ically, we p esen coe icien es ima es om
an OLS eg ession wi hou a cons an , whe e each A D s a us dummy (new, o he , non-A D)
is in e ac ed wi h he ea men dummies o p iming o no p iming. We also include a base-
line se o con ol a iables. This gi es us he means o all s a us- ea men combina ions ha
accoun o co ec ions o any di e ences in obse ables be ween hose g oups. A he bo om
o Table 1, we p o ide es s a is ics o he abo e ou hypo heses.
Fi s , we see ha all A D suppo e s epo wo se well-being han nonsuppo e s. We also
see ha , wi h p iming, all h ee g oups epo highe de e io a ions in well-being. Rega ding
an o e all p iming e ec , we can ejec H4. The e is an o e all p iming e ec . Howe e , o he
h ee g oups, new A D suppo e s a e hose whose well-being is mos nega i ely in luenced by
p iming, and we can ejec H1. While we canno ejec he hypo hesis ha he e ec o new
A D suppo e s is simila o he e ec o o he suppo e s (H2), we can ejec he hypo hesis
ha he e ec is no di e en om he e ec o non-A D suppo e s (H3).
Iden i y p iming a ound he A D ede al pa y con en ion— he na u al
expe imen
In he p e ious sec ion, we p esen ed a su ey expe imen ha allowed us o causally e alua e
an e ec o populis iden i y p iming on well-being. While such an expe imen allows o clean
PLOS ONE
Suppo o a igh -wing populis pa y and subjec i e well-being
PLOS ONE | h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0303133 June 26, 2024 6 / 16
Table 1. Causal e ec s o p iming poli ical iden i y in wo expe imen s: Expe imen al module in Wa e 4 and na u al expe imen in Wa e 2.
Expe imen al module in
2021
Na u al expe imen in
2020
Ou come a iable: eeling wo se sco e (a e age o e ou well-being ques ions)
I II
new (ma ginal) A D x no p iming A 0.113
(0.078)
0.159**
(0.073)
new (ma ginal) A D x p iming B 0.217***
(0.080)
0.193**
(0.076)
o he A D x no p iming C 0.077
(0.073)
0.268***
(0.075)
o he A D x p iming D 0.102
(0.074)
0.199**
(0.082)
non A D x no p iming E -0.063
(0.072)
0.074
(0.070)
non A D x p iming F -0.039
(0.073)
0.069
(0.071)
accina ion block -0.013
(0.011)
age 0.012***
(0.003)
0.008***
(0.003)
age *age -0.000***
(0.000)
-0.000**
(0.000)
eas e n Ge man s a es dummy -0.012
(0.014)
-0.027*
(0.016)
Be lin dummy 0.007
(0.027)
0.009
(0.031)
subu ban dummy 0.008
(0.014)
0.001
(0.015)
u ban dummy -0.029**
(0.014)
-0.005
(0.014)
seconda y educa ion dummy 0.025
(0.016)
0.008
(0.017)
highe educa ion en ance quali ica ion dummy 0.017
(0.021)
0.007
(0.022)
uni e si y deg ee dummy 0.057***
(0.019)
0.038*
(0.020)
sel -employed dummy 0.008
(0.028)
0.055*
(0.031)
manual wo ke dummy -0.011
(0.018)
0.025
(0.020)
execu i e wo ke dummy 0.005
(0.021)
-0.034
(0.023)
age 65+ dummy -0.028
(0.023)
-0.040*
(0.024)
emale dummy -0.019
(0.012)
0.011
(0.012)
numbe o household membe s 0.007
(0.005)
0.011*
(0.006)
income -0.076***
(0.009)
-0.058***
(0.010)
income *income 0.004***
(0.001)
0.004***
(0.001)
Obse a ions 3,768 3,224
R
2
0.433 0.394
(Con inued)
PLOS ONE
Suppo o a igh -wing populis pa y and subjec i e well-being
PLOS ONE | h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0303133 June 26, 2024 7 / 16
causal a ibu ion o he e ec o he manipula ion, iden i y p iming migh no wo k in such a
s uc u ed way in he ield. Also, he esul s ha we ha e obse ed could ha e a isen as a s a is-
ical a e ac —a e all, “one swallow doesn’ make a summe ” [48]. Replica ions o once-es ab-
lished indings can g ea ly aise con idence in hei e aci y [49,50] and boos pos s udy
p obabili ies [48]. In his subsec ion, we ask whe he we can eplica e ou p e ious esul s in a
di e en —po en ially mo e ealis ic—con ex . Such a con ex was deli e ed o us in wa e 2,
which allowed us o exploi he ac ha he A D ede al pa y con en ion ook place on
No embe 28–29, 2020, in he middle o ou sampling window, which an om No embe 23
o Decembe 14. The con en ion ecei ed conside able media a en ion, which se es as ou
p ime.
Al hough he p ima y goal o he con en ion was o o mula e posi ions ega ding social
policy, in pa icula pe aining o he pension sys em, he con en ion ended wi h a li ely in e -
nal dispu e be ween he mode a e and he mo e adical wing o he pa y ha ollowed a e
he opening add ess by pa y chai man Jo¨ g Meu hen. This dispu e was widely epo ed in he
media. The e was a spike in he numbe o p ess a icles con aining a ph ase “A D Pa ei ag”
Table 1. (Con inued)
Expe imen al module in
2021
Na u al expe imen in
2020
Hypo heses: Wald es p- alue
H1: no p iming e ec on new (ma ginal) A D A = B 0.024 0.278
H2: p iming e ec on new (ma ginal) A D no di e en om he e ec on s ong
A D
A-B = C-D 0.115 0.074
H3: p iming e ec on new (ma ginal) A D no di e en om he e ec on non
A D
A-B = E-F 0.097 0.259
H4: no o e all p iming e ec A-B = C-D = E-F = 0 0.018 0.345
Robus e o s; Coe icien es ima es om a linea eg ession wi hou a cons an . Income is indi idual income measu ed mon hly in €1,000; accina ion block is he
o de o addi ional ques ions on accina ion be o e o a e he well-being ques ions
*p<0.10
** p<0.05
*** p<0.01
h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0303133. 001
Fig 2. Causal e ec s o p iming poli ical iden i y in wo expe imen s: Expe imen al module in Wa e 4 and na u al
expe imen in Wa e 2. Coe icien es ima es om Table 1; hick lines—90% con idence in e als, hin lines—95%
con idence in e als.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0303133.g002
PLOS ONE
Suppo o a igh -wing populis pa y and subjec i e well-being
PLOS ONE | h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0303133 June 26, 2024 8 / 16
26. To abi MR, Seo D-C. Na ional S udy o Beha io al and Li e Changes Since Sep embe 11. Heal h Edu-
ca ion & Beha io . 2004; 31: 179–192. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/1090198103259183 PMID: 15090120
27. Be ns ein KT, Ahe n J, T acy M, Bosca ino JA, Vlaho D, Galea S. Tele ision Wa ching and he Risk o
Inciden P obable Pos auma ic S ess Diso de . Jou nal o Ne ous & Men al Disease. 2007; 195: 41–
47. h ps://doi.o g/10.1097/01.nmd.0000244784.36745.a5
28. P e e baum B, P e e baum RL, No h CS, Neas BR. Does Tele ision Viewing Sa is y C i e ia o Expo-
su e in Pos auma ic S ess Diso de ? Psychia y: In e pe sonal and Biological P ocesses. 2002; 65:
306–309. h ps://doi.o g/10.1521/psyc.65.4.306.20242 PMID: 12530333
29. Bonanno GA, B ewin CR, Kanias y K, G eca AM La. Weighing he Cos s o Disas e . Psychological Sci-
ence in he Public In e es . 2010; 11: 1–49. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/1529100610387086
30. P ice M, Leg and AC, B ie ZMF, an S olk-Cooke K, Peck K, Dodds PS, e al. Doomsc olling du ing
COVID-19: The nega i e associa ion be ween daily social and adi ional media consump ion and men-
al heal h symp oms du ing he COVID-19 pandemic. Psychol T auma. 2022; 14: 1338–1346. h ps://
doi.o g/10.1037/ a0001202 PMID: 35157484
31. Riehm KE, Holingue C, Kalb LG, Benne D, Kap eyn A, Jiang Q, e al. Associa ions Be ween Media
Exposu e and Men al Dis ess Among U.S. Adul s a he Beginning o he COVID-19 Pandemic. Am J
P e Med. 2020; 59: 630–638. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.amep e.2020.06.008 PMID: 33011008
32. Wa hele M, Duhem S, Vai a G, Baube T, Hab an E, Vee apa E, e al. Fac o s Associa ed Wi h Men al
Heal h Diso de s Among Uni e si y S uden s in F ance Con ined Du ing he COVID-19 Pandemic.
JAMA Ne w Open. 2020; 3: 1–13. h ps://doi.o g/10.1001/jamane wo kopen.2020.25591
33. Buchanan K, Aknin LB, Lo un S, Sands om GM. B ie exposu e o social media du ing he COVID-19
pandemic: Doom-sc olling has nega i e emo ional consequences, bu kindness-sc olling does no .
PLoS One. 2021; 16: 1–12. h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0257728 PMID: 34644310
34. Buchanan K, Sands om GM. Bu e ing he e ec s o bad news: Exposu e o o he s’ kindness alle ia es
he a e si e e ec s o iewing o he s’ ac s o immo ali y. PLoS One. 2023; 18: 1–26. h ps://doi.o g/10.
1371/jou nal.pone.0284438 PMID: 37195988
35. Wi z DS. Pe suasion Th ough Emo ion? An Expe imen al Tes o he Emo ion-Elici ing Na u e o Popu-
lis Communica ion. In J Commun. 2018; 12: 1114–1138.
36. Kaise C. Using memo ies o assess he in ape sonal compa abili y o wellbeing epo s. J Econ Beha
O gan. 2022; 193: 410–442. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.jebo.2021.11.009
37. Klemm M. Well-being Changes om Yea o Yea : A Compa ison o Cu en , Remembe ed and P e-
dic ed Li e Sa is ac ion. J Happiness S ud. 2022; 23: 1669–1681. h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s10902-021-
00468-0
38. S e el M, Oppenheime DM. Happy by Wha S anda d? The Role o In e pe sonal and In ape sonal
Compa isons in Ra ings o Happiness. Soc Indic Res. 2009; 92: 69–79. h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s11205-
008-9289-5
39. Rod ik D. Why Does Globaliza ion Fuel Populism? Economics, Cul u e, and he Rise o Righ -Wing
Populism. Annu Re Econom. 2021; 13: 133–170. h ps://doi.o g/10.1146/annu e -economics-070220-
032416
40. Be bui N, Lewandowsky M, Si i J. The A D and i s sympa hise s: Finally a igh -wing populis mo e-
men in Ge many? Ge Poli . 2015; 24: 157–178. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/09644008.2014.982546
41. Schmi -Beck R, an De h JW, S aud A. Die A D nach de ech spopulis ischen WendeThe A D a e i s
igh -wing populis u n. Zei sch i u¨ Poli ikwissenscha . 2017; 27: 273–303. h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/
s41358-017-0104-1
42. Leng eld H. „Al e na i e u¨ Deu schland“: eine Pa ei u¨ Mode nisie ungs e lie e ? KZ SS Ko
¨lne Zei -
sch i u¨ Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie. 2017; 69: 209–232. h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s11577-017-
0446-1
43. Schwande H, Manow P. I ’s no he economy, s upid! Explaining he elec o al success o he Ge man
igh -wing populis A D. 2017.
44. Sch o
¨de M. A D-Un e s u¨ ze sind nich abgeha
¨ng , sonde n ausla
¨nde eindlich. SOEPpape s. 2018;
975.
45. Gieble H, Hi sch M, Schu¨ mann B, Vei S. Discon en Wi h Wha ? Linking Sel -Cen e ed and Socie y-
Cen e ed Discon en o Populis Pa y Suppo . Poli S ud (Ox ). 2020. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/
0032321720932115
46. Pes hy M, Made M, Schoen H. Why Is he A D so Success ul in Eas e n Ge many? An Analysis o he
Idea ional Founda ions o he A D Vo e in he 2017 Fede al Elec ion. Poli Vie eljah essch . 2021; 62:
69–91. h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s11615-020-00285-9
47. Cohen GL. Pa y O e Policy: The Domina ing Impac o G oup In luence on Poli ical Belie s. J Pe s
Soc Psychol. 2003; 85: 808–822. h ps://doi.o g/10.1037/0022-3514.85.5.808 PMID: 14599246
PLOS ONE
Suppo o a igh -wing populis pa y and subjec i e well-being
PLOS ONE | h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0303133 June 26, 2024 15 / 16
48. Maniadis Z, Tu ano F, Lis JA. One Swallow Doesn’ Make a Summe : New E idence on Ancho ing
E ec s. Ame ican Economic Re iew. 2014; 104: 277–290. h ps://doi.o g/10.1257/ae .104.1.277
49. Came e CF, D ebe A, Holzmeis e F, Ho T-H, Hube J, Johannesson M, e al. E alua ing he eplica-
bili y o social science expe imen s in Na u e and Science be ween 2010 and 2015. Na Hum Beha .
2018; 2: 637–644. h ps://doi.o g/10.1038/s41562-018-0399-z PMID: 31346273
50. Came e CF, D ebe A, Fo sell E, Ho T-H, Hube J, Johannesson M, e al. E alua ing eplicabili y o lab-
o a o y expe imen s in economics. Science (1979). 2016; 351: 1433–1436. h ps://doi.o g/10.1126/
science.aa 0918 PMID: 26940865
51. BuzzSumo. Da ase : Numbe o a icles pe day wi h sea ch ph ase “A D Pa ei ag” be ween 23 No em-
be and 14 Dezembe 2020. 2023.
52. Ma gali Y. Economic Insecu i y and he Causes o Populism, Reconside ed. Jou nal o Economic Pe -
spec i es. 2019; 33: 152–170. h ps://doi.o g/10.1257/jep.33.4.152
53. Ingleha R, No is P. T ump and he Populis Au ho i a ian Pa ies: The Silen Re olu ion in Re e se.
Pe spec i es on Poli ics. 2017; 15: 443–454. h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/S1537592717000111
54. A zheime K, Be ning CC. How he Al e na i e o Ge many (A D) and hei o e s ee ed o he adical
igh , 2013–2017. Elec S ud. 2019; 60: 2013–2017. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.elec s ud.2019.04.004
55. Hansen MA, Olsen J. Flesh o he Same Flesh: A S udy o Vo e s o he Al e na i e o Ge many (A D)
in he 2017 Fede al Elec ion. Ge Poli . 2019; 28: 1–19. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/09644008.2018.
1509312
56. I a s la en E. Radical Righ Pa ies: Vo e s and Pa ies in he Elec o al Ma ke . JSTOR; 2007.
57. Mughan A, Pax on P. An i-immig an sen imen , policy p e e ences and populis pa y o ing in Aus a-
lia. B J Poli Sci. 2006; 36: 341–358. h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/S0007123406000184
58. Scha
¨ e A, Zu¨ n M. Die demok a ische Reg ession. Die poli ischen U sachen des au o i a
¨ en Populis-
mus Be lin: Suh kamp. 2021.
59. an de Bles AM, Pos mes T, LeKande -Kanis B, O jes S. The Consequences o Collec i e Discon en :
A New Measu e o Zei geis P edic s Vo ing o Ex eme Pa ies. Poli Psychol. 2018; 39: 381–398.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/pops.12424
60. Van de B ug W, Fennema M. P o es o mains eam? How he Eu opean an i-immig an pa ies ha e
de eloped in o wo sepa a e g oups by 1999. Eu J Poli Res. 2003; 42: 55–76.
61. Owen AL, Vide as J, Willemsen C. Democ acy, Pa icipa ion, and Li e Sa is ac ion. Soc Sci Q. 2008;
89: 987–1005. h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/j.1540-6237.2008.00595.x
62. Di Tella R, MacCulloch R. Pa isan Social Happiness. Re iew o Economic S udies. 2005; 72: 367–393.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/j.1467-937X.2005.00336.x
PLOS ONE
Suppo o a igh -wing populis pa y and subjec i e well-being
PLOS ONE | h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0303133 June 26, 2024 16 / 16
