UpDate - Vol. 12, No. 7, Page 8                                
October 15, 1992                                               
Matter of choice; Personality significant factor in voter preference    
                                                               
     Personality and politics are interrelated when it comes to      
voters' selection of candidates for office, according to Gordon      
DiRenzo, professor of sociology.                                     
     DiRenzo has been carrying out longitudinal research since 1964 on        
the personality characteristics of voters as they relate to the public        
personalities of candidates during presidential elections. His ongoing        
research project has determined that the personality link between    
voters and their candidates of choice can play an important role in an        
election.                                                            
     Voters tend to vote for those whose public personalities are    
compatible with their own, DiRenzo said. For example, some voters are
attracted to authoritarian, dogmatic, dominant figures, who tend to be        
conservative and resistant to change. Others prefer non-dogmatic, more        
open-minded candidates.                                              
     "Research has shown that many voters choose certain candidates on  
the basis of their perceived personalities. These may not be their   
true personalities but their public personas. For example, in 1964,  
Republican nominee Barry Goldwater came across as an authoritarian,  
dogmatic, close-minded-some would even say fascistic-individual. In  
contrast, Johnson seemed non-dogmatic and non-authoritarian, although,        
in actuality, he rather strongly exhibited both of these psychological        
characteristics," DiRenzo said.                                      
     In the 1964 election, many voters crossed party lines to vote for        
candidates based on their own personalities and their perceived      
personalities of Goldwater and Johnson, DiRenzo said.                
     In some presidential elections, there are not any significant   
differences in the projected personalities of the candidates, such as
the Carter/Ford, Mondale/Reagan races. In these cases, the hypothesis
cannot be as clearly supported, DiRenzo said.                        
     This year, DiRenzo said he feels the projected personalities of    
Gov. Bill Clinton and President George Bush do not present a strong  
contrast. However, the emergence of Ross Perot as a candidate has    
changed the choices considerably. DiRenzo says he is intrigued by the
effect of Perot upon the election in terms of significant            
compatibility between his projected personality and that of voters. Is        
that the basis of his appeal for the electorate?                     
     Possibly an answer will emerge in late October when DiRenzo and 
his students begin research on the 1992 election.                    
     The public personality of a candidate is not the only factor in 
an election; there are many variables, DiRenzo said. Social and      
economic issues, for example, certainly do influence an election.    
Class, gender, religion, region, race and ethnicity also may influence        
voting decisions. But research has shown that the personality factor 
crosses all these lines and influences voters' choices, DiRenzo said.
     During presidential election years, DiRenzo teaches a course       
entitled "Personality and Politics." Part of the course involves     
students carrying out research on the election. A sampling of voters 
from all walks of life are given a personality test and asked to chose        
a candidate, as part of the extensive study. A panel of expert       
referees analyzes the public personality of the candidates. The      
results are then compared.                                           
     Where there is a clear-cut choice in candidates' personalities, 
voters who are conservative and dislike change, and who feel         
comfortable with an authoritatarian, dogmatic figure generally vote  
for a candidate demonstrating these qualities. Those who are         
non-dogmatic, more tolerant of change and flexible in their thinking 
tend to select the opposite type of candidate.                       
     Di Renzo's research has shown that older voters in particular,  
and increasing numbers of student and women voters do not like change.        
They prefer order and structure and tend to vote for more dogmatic   
candidates.                                                          
     The effect of personality compatibility on the election, however,  
depends on the nature and distribution of the modal (typical)        
personality type among the electorate, he said.                      
     DiRenzo has done extensive research on political parties in both
Italy and in the United States. Unlike the United States where both  
parties promote democracy as a form of government, there are more    
clearly defined ideological differences in political groups in       
Italy-with communists, fascists, monarchists and socialists, as well 
as those favoring democracy, active in the political arena. One of his        
areas of research is determining the role of personality in ideology 
and party choice, and its influence, in turn, on forming coalition   
governments.                                                         
     Among his publications are two books related to this research:  
Personality and Politics, published by Doubleday, which deals with   
American politics, and Personality, Power and Politics, published by 
the University of Notre Dame Press, which examines Italian politics. 
                                        -Sue Swyers Moncure