Get Regular Updates!


Psychology of a Trump victory

Psychology of a Trump victory

Donald Trump's supporters believed what he said - and didn't change their vote even if they knew he lied.

Psychology of a Trump victory

Ahead of the 2016 Presidential election, a series of studies focusing on candidate credibility and voter opinion were conducted to see what voters thought of what the presidential hopefuls were saying.

The study showed some unusual results when it came to the voters and helps explain some of the forces that swept a certain divisive billionaire to power.

The research found that, if information was attributed to Donald Trump, Republican Trump supporters believed it more than if it was presented without attribution. The opposite case was found to be true for Democrats.

The research was led by Briony Swire, a PhD student at UWA and MIT.

The problem with corrections

Study author Professor Stephan Lewandowsky, from UWA and the University of Bristol, says the research set out to see whether people were sensitive to corrections of things said by Donald Trump during the primary campaign.

“We thought that maybe what would happen is that people who were supporters of Donald Trump would not be sensitive to a correction,” he says.

“In actual fact, both supporters and opponents of Donald Trump were sensitive to the corrections, and they were sensitive to affirmations of true statements.”

However, although Trump supporters reduced their belief in misinformation if it was corrected, the lies did not change their voting preferences.

“There was absolutely no association between the extent to which people changed their mind in response to what we said and their feelings about Donald Trump or their intentions to vote for him,” Stephan says.

“In other words, correcting the information basically made no difference [for Trump supporters].”

The end of truth?

Stephan says he suspects that people didn’t feel lied to by Donald Trump.

“I suspect that his supporters are not concerned about his statements and whether he’s truthful or not,” he says.

“I think they’re more concerned about the way he resonates with their own feelings emotionally, and against that background, I think facts just don’t matter.”

Trump was often accused of reinforcing people’s existing prejudices with statements he made during the campaign. But Stephan believes it goes beyond that.

“I think that we’re now confronting a situation where facts overall have just sort of lost their relevance in public discourse,” he says.

“It has just become commonplace for people to create their own realities.”

‘Alternative facts’ appear to have become totally acceptable for a large number of people, Stephan says.

“They say, ‘Well, I don’t care what you tell me, I look at it this way, I’m entitled to my opinion and therefore I’m also entitled to my own facts’,” he says.

“I personally think that is deeply problematic for a democracy.”

Where it all began—weapons of mass destruction

While troubling, Stephan says it’s important to recognise that this rejection of facts isn’t entirely new.

He pinpoints the idea there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq in the lead-up to the 2003 invasion as the first time this happened so blatantly. This was an idea later shown to be untrue.

Stephan says more than a third of Americans believed there had been weapons of mass destruction even after the war was over.

He says surveys as recently as 2010 showed two-thirds of Republicans and 10% of Democrats continued to believe in their existence.

Particle Puns


Creative Commons Logo

Republishing our content

We want our stories to be shared and seen by as many people as possible.

Therefore, unless it says otherwise, copyright on the stories on Particle belongs to Scitech and they are published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

This allows you to republish our articles online or in print for free. You just need to credit us and link to us, and you can’t edit our material or sell it separately.

Using the ‘republish’ button on our website is the easiest way to meet our guidelines.


You cannot edit the article.

When republishing, you have to credit our authors, ideally in the byline. You have to credit Particle with a link back to the original publication on Particle.

If you’re republishing online, you must use our pageview counter, link to us and include links from our story. Our page view counter is a small pixel-ping (invisible to the eye) that allows us to know when our content is republished. It’s a condition of our guidelines that you include our counter. If you use the ‘republish’ then you’ll capture our page counter.

If you’re republishing in print, please email us to let us so we know about it (we get very proud to see our work republished) and you must include the Particle logo next to the credits. Download logo here.

If you wish to republish all our stories, please contact us directly to discuss this opportunity.


Most of the images used on Particle are copyright of the photographer who made them.

It is your responsibility to confirm that you’re licensed to republish images in our articles.


All Particle videos can be accessed through YouTube under the Standard YouTube Licence.

The Standard YouTube licence

  1. This licence is ‘All Rights Reserved’, granting provisions for YouTube to display the content, and YouTube’s visitors to stream the content. This means that the content may be streamed from YouTube but specifically forbids downloading, adaptation, and redistribution, except where otherwise licensed. When uploading your content to YouTube it will automatically use the Standard YouTube licence. You can check this by clicking on Advanced Settings and looking at the dropdown box ‘License and rights ownership’.
  2. When a user is uploading a video he has license options that he can choose from. The first option is “standard YouTube License” which means that you grant the broadcasting rights to YouTube. This essentially means that your video can only be accessed from YouTube for watching purpose and cannot be reproduced or distributed in any other form without your consent.


For more information about using our content, email us:

Copy this HTML into your CMS
Press Ctrl+C to copy

We've got chemistry. Want something physical?