<p><em>Open versus Closed: Personality, Identity, and the Politics of Redistribution</em> (Johnston, Lavine, &amp; Federico, 2017) is a good reference that talks about how political engagement relates to psychology. Includes review of literature in this area.</p>
<p>More specifically, research is covered that explores the role political figures have in informing what Americans want from the government, and how individual difference in psychology contribute to this.</p>
<p><a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316341452" rel="nofollow noreferrer">They find that for politically active citizens these attitudes are not driven by self-interest, but by a desire to express the traits and cultural commitments that define their identities.</a></p>
<p>This book is a great general reference that speaks to the dynamic between those that are politically engaged and elected officials.</p>
<p>More specific to your question, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2020.41" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Sherman et al. (2020)</a> examines communication in the exchange between citizens and elected officials on climate policy. Sample was drawn by</p>
<blockquote>
<p>...recruiting citizen activists who lobby the US Congress for a carbon pricing policy to address climate change (Sherman et al., 2020, p.576).</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In this way, 4 social psychological approaches including: affirmation, social norms, legacy and immediacy, were examined to assess how citizens think about and contact political leaders. Sherman's et al (2020) results show:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>A strategy of establishing shared values and common ground (affirmation) was used most frequently overall. While, emphasizing the long-term costs and benefits of addressing climate change (legacy) was employed less frequently than affirmation and seen as less effective by activists, but it was the only strategy that was associated with perceived increases in Congressional Representatives’ support of the policy.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>References</strong></p>
<p>Johnston, C., Lavine, H., &amp; Federico, C. (2017). <em>Open versus Closed: Personality, Identity, and the Politics of Redistribution</em>. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316341452" rel="nofollow noreferrer">10.1017/9781316341452</a></p>
<p>Sherman, D., Shteyn, M., Han, H., &amp; Van Boven, L. (2021). The exchange between citizens and elected officials: A social psychological framework for citizen climate activists. <em>Behavioural Public Policy, 5</em>(4), 576-605. doi: <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2020.41" rel="nofollow noreferrer">10.1017/bpp.2020.41</a></p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-11-06T13:01:13.963Z
This resource could help with the psychology of those who contact their electeds. Does this book help with *"literature on electeds' response to such communications (real or self-perceived)"*?
Chris Rogers
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-11-07T00:59:29.190Z
I edited my response to include a reference that more specifically zones in on the variables in question. However, the book referenced first is a good general source to learn more about the dynamic between engaged citizens and political leaders.
stephan_phd
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-11-05T22:49:47.527Z
2021-11-07T06:10:36.233Z
2021-11-07T06:10:36.233Z
stephan_phd
<p>I am a law and public policy scholar, and I'm currently developing a civics curriculum for YouTube. As a phd, I'm (perhaps to an unhealthy degree) concerned with being able to cite good science whenever it's available.</p>
<p>However, my own field of political science has rather let me down. I am trying to gather data about the impacts of citizen engagement with government in a number of ways, and one of the key mechanisms I'm looking at is contacting one's electeds (&quot;write your congressman!&quot; etc.).</p>
<p>The problem is I'm not able to find literature on electeds' response to such communications (real or self-perceived) but have noticed some studies in behavioral psych that are next door to these themes.</p>
<p>Lacking in a solid base of literature to begin from makes this search even harder and so...</p>
<p>Q: Which authors/texts are considered foundational in political psychology, or behavioral psychology that covers political contexts?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-11-05T17:09:09.653Z
Re "have noticed some studies in behavioral psych that are next door to these" - can you provide examples so we have a better idea of what you have in mind?
Arnon Weinberg
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-11-05T17:38:47.317Z
@ArnonWeinberg Yeah, can do. I'll put up some citations when I get home tonight.
William Walker III
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-11-07T01:01:16.937Z
Check out Sherman et al. (2020) added in my comment below.
stephan_phd
<reference-request><behavior><political-psychology>
Where to begin with Political Psychology literature?
William Walker III
# Where to begin with Political Psychology literature?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2021-08-26)

I am a law and public policy scholar, and I'm currently developing a civics curriculum for YouTube. As a phd, I'm (perhaps to an unhealthy degree) concerned with being able to cite good science whenever it's available.

However, my own field of political science has rather let me down. I am trying to gather data about the impacts of citizen engagement with government in a number of ways, and one of the key mechanisms I'm looking at is contacting one's electeds ("write your congressman!" etc.).

The problem is I'm not able to find literature on electeds' response to such communications (real or self-perceived) but have noticed some studies in behavioral psych that are next door to these themes.

Lacking in a solid base of literature to begin from makes this search even harder and so...

Q: Which authors/texts are considered foundational in political psychology, or behavioral psychology that covers political contexts?

**Tags:** reference-request, behavior, political-psychology

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Re "have noticed some studies in behavioral psych that are next door to these" - can you provide examples so we have a better idea of what you have in mind?  
> **username_0**: @ArnonWeinberg Yeah, can do. I'll put up some citations when I get home tonight.  
> **username_2**: Check out Sherman et al. (2020) added in my comment below.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2021-11-05. Score: 2 | Accepted answer

*Open versus Closed: Personality, Identity, and the Politics of Redistribution* (Johnston, Lavine, & Federico, 2017) is a good reference that talks about how political engagement relates to psychology. Includes review of literature in this area.

More specifically, research is covered that explores the role political figures have in informing what Americans want from the government, and how individual difference in psychology contribute to this.

[They find that for politically active citizens these attitudes are not driven by self-interest, but by a desire to express the traits and cultural commitments that define their identities.](https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316341452)

This book is a great general reference that speaks to the dynamic between those that are politically engaged and elected officials.

More specific to your question, [Sherman et al. (2020)](https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2020.41) examines communication in the exchange between citizens and elected officials on climate policy. Sample was drawn by

> ...recruiting citizen activists who lobby the US Congress for a carbon pricing policy to address climate change (Sherman et al., 2020, p.576).

In this way, 4 social psychological approaches including: affirmation, social norms, legacy and immediacy, were examined to assess how citizens think about and contact political leaders. Sherman's et al (2020) results show:

> A strategy of establishing shared values and common ground (affirmation) was used most frequently overall. While, emphasizing the long-term costs and benefits of addressing climate change (legacy) was employed less frequently than affirmation and seen as less effective by activists, but it was the only strategy that was associated with perceived increases in Congressional Representatives’ support of the policy.

**References**

Johnston, C., Lavine, H., & Federico, C. (2017). *Open versus Closed: Personality, Identity, and the Politics of Redistribution*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: [10.1017/9781316341452](https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316341452)

Sherman, D., Shteyn, M., Han, H., & Van Boven, L. (2021). The exchange between citizens and elected officials: A social psychological framework for citizen climate activists. *Behavioural Public Policy, 5*(4), 576-605. doi: [10.1017/bpp.2020.41](https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2020.41)

> **Comments:**
> **username_3**: This resource could help with the psychology of those who contact their electeds. Does this book help with *"literature on electeds' response to such communications (real or self-perceived)"*?  
> **username_2**: I edited my response to include a reference that more specifically zones in on the variables in question. However, the book referenced first is a good general source to learn more about the dynamic between engaged citizens and political leaders.  

---

