Image credit: www.dos.pa.gov
Professor Nichola Gutgold, a Penn State professor of communications arts and sciences and author of the book “Madam President: Five Women who paved the way,” appeared on Radio New Zealand’s “Checkpoint” news program Wednesday (Tuesday evening EST) as preliminary U.S. presidential election results began to come in.
Listen to her commentary here on radionz.co.nz.
Image credit: newamericamedia.org
Christopher Beem, managing director of the McCourtney Institute for Democracy at Penn State; Dan Letwin, social history professor; and Rob Speel, associate professor of political science, were all recently quoted in a Sunbury Daily Item article about the presidential election. Here’s an excerpt:
“ ‘No matter where you come down politically, I don’t think anyone thinks this campaign has been a pleasant experience,’ said Christopher Beem, managing director, The McCourtney Institute of Democracy at Penn State University.
“What does the last year say about America? ‘A lot of things,’ social historian Dan Letwin, a professor at Penn State University said.
“ ‘In most election years, win or lose, a good number of supporters of one candidate can accept the other candidate as a viable, legitimate president. Here, the vast majority of Trump supporters will not accept Hillary as a legitimate alternative, as the vast number of Clinton supporters will not accept Trump. Things are incredibly polarized,’ Letwin said.
“American politics has become almost tribal, noted Robert Speel, associate professor of politics at Penn State University. Supporters of both major party candidates often overlook the deep flaws of the candidate they support because the voters have such a deep-seated animosity towards the other party or candidate, Speel said.”
Read more at DailyItem.com.
Screenshot from a video of Donald Trump and Billy Bush that made national headlines during the presidential race.
Mark Feinberg, a clinical psychologist and health and human development research professor at Penn State, recently wrote an op-ed about the psychology of bullying in relation to some events during the 2016 presidential campaign. Here’s an excerpt:
“There are parallels here to the peer dynamics involved in bullying among kids. Researchers observe that there are more than just bullies and victims in schoolyard bullying situations. The bully often has lieutenants and supporters, and the presence of these kids creates enough fear to help silence and control the largest group of kids: the silent bystanders. One component of anti-bullying programs is sending the message to bystanders that silence enables more bullying, that they share in the responsibility if they don’t at least tell an adult.
Mark Feinberg
“But how do bullies and their lieutenants form their loyal mutual-aggression pacts with each other? How do they know they can trust each other? After all, they surely don’t say, ‘If I go trip Bethany, will you guys to stand there and scare her friends into silence?’ Researchers have discovered that one important bonding mechanism is ‘deviant talk.’ Although a terrible label, deviant talk refers to the usually jovial and spirited discussions among kids that center on antisocial, anti-authority or aggressive themes. For the kids who engage in it, deviant talk is downright enjoyable—it usually involves a lot of laughter and fun. And this shared laughter and encouragement reinforces kids’ existing tendencies toward oppositional, delinquent or violent behavior. Research shows that deviant talk among friends or siblings predicts increased levels of antisocial and aggressive behavior from year to year.”
Read more at momentmag.com.