Reading the Mind Of the Body Politic (Neuroscience in presidential politics)

The Wall Street Journal (excerpt) (subscription required) ^ | December 14, 2007 | Alexandra Alter

[HAL9000]

Excerpt -

Last Sunday at a San Francisco hotel ballroom, EmSense researchers fitted five volunteers, all undecided Republicans, with battery-powered headsets made of elastic and lined with bits of copper. As they watched the debate on a big screen, the wireless units, which the company calls "EmGear," collected data on their skin temperature, heart rate, eye-blinking and brain activity and beamed them to a bank of computers. The data were run through a formula created by EmSense to identify whether a response was positive or negative.

When John McCain ran through a list of Hispanic politicians who had endorsed him, the company says the brain-wave frequencies of the test subjects stayed flat, indicating a lack of interest. When Mike Huckabee argued that withdrawing troops from Iraq would create a power vacuum for terrorists, the volunteers' adrenaline spiked. Fred Thompson's discussion of health care caused a pattern of brain activity that suggests the viewers thought about what he said, but didn't like it. The company, which says it plans to begin contacting campaigns later this month, says it could help candidates vet advertisements or hone their language and delivery in speeches.

Politics has always lagged behind business in adopting new marketing methods. One reason is cost: A typical brain-scan study costs around $10,000 for a small sample and can run up to $50,000 for multiple demographics. Moreover, candidates may shy away from tactics that could be seen as calculating or manipulative. "Taken to its logical limit," says Martha Farah, director of the neuroethics program at the University of Pennsylvania, "it's a kind of mind reading."

~ snip ~

[scooter2]

Isn’t “mind of the body politic” an oxymoron?

[shrinkermd]

Good post. We will see if anyone reads. Incidentally, Westen's book has been summarized on FR. It can be found: HERE.

[linear]

I have a better idea. Why don’t the candidates just say what they believe and let the voters judge them on the merits of their ideas?

[RC2]

Great....now we have a machine that will help the politicians lie and just say what they think the people want to hear.

[HAL9000]

Thanks for the link to your review. For better or worse, this is probably the future of politics.

[Bruinator]

This is just a more high tech version of th famous clinton focus group.

[r9etb]

Scientologists have been doing that for years....

[RegulatorCountry]

Why don’t the candidates just say what they believe and let the voters judge them on the merits of their ideas?

Well, that's just silly ... what would all the consultants do then? /sarc

[Rudder]

They didn’t measure adrenalin. But they report that volunteers “adrenalin spiked.” “Neuroethics” program? This sound hokey to me, like total B.S.