table of Contents
Chapter 11, optimistic leader of the hearts of the people
January 1988, 13 presidential candidates began running around, expression of political opinion. There are six Republican candidates, including Bush (George Bush) and poll Dole (RobertDole) is relatively close. Many people think that Bush would lose, because Dole and Bush's tough weak. But evangelist Robertson (Pat Robertson), the conservative Kemp (Jack Kemp) and Haig (Alexander Haig) General strength can not be overlooked.
The Democratic Party is promising everyone, all uncertain, Central Plains were a lot of, I do not know who the winner.
Hart (Gary Hart) seems to have recovered from a sex scandal in the last, again leading in the polls. Senator Simon (Paul Simon), Massachusetts Governor Dukakis, Senator Al Gore (AlbertGore), and Rep. Gephardt (Richard Gephardt) are considered to be promising, and black priest Jackson (Jesse Jackson) It is considered only get black votes.
We see this with the CAVE technology to analyze 13 contenders speechwriter, score, come to our forecast. In a February weekend before the Iowa primaries, Zuluo insisted that we should put our predictions in a sealed envelope, sent to the "New York Times", and put a Department of Psychology Department at the University of Pennsylvania there, in order to avoid what if our prediction, but no one believes.
In early May, after the dust settles primaries, Zuluo told me to sit down, he sealed envelope in early February compared with the predicted results of the primaries, I could hardly believe my eyes: simply absolutely correct!
I've read Freud's early articles strongly influenced the direction of my research later. A science fiction writer Isaac Asimov (Isaac Asimov) although unlike Freud so famous, but the impact of his works for me but farther.
In his book is a look on the fit to the novel "base Trilogy" (Foundation Trilogy), Asimov was thoughtful, covered with acne child to create a hero - Selden ( Hari Selden). He created a psychological historian, specializing predict the future. Selden think the individual is unpredictable, but composed of groups of individuals can be predicted. You just have statistical formulas and principles of behavior Selden (Asimov never revealed this secret to us), you can predict the course of history. "Wow!" These young people admire them very much: "the principles of psychology can be used to predict the future!"
This has been with me, "wow!." When I was a junior professor, I was very excited to find psychological history really exist. Later, I and my good friend, assistant professor of history at the University of Pennsylvania Kos (AlanKors) and opened a psychological history lesson. This course gives us a chance to explore the academic world Asimov. It was found that this was a disappointing attempt.
We have read the research done by Ericsson (Erik Erikson), he attempted to Freud's psychoanalytic principles apply to Martin Luther (Martin Luther) body. Eriksson said Luther against the Catholic courage from the urine of his childhood training, Professor Eriksson from Luther sporadic childhood in historical records, we came to this startling conclusion. This whimsical corollary is definitely not the intention of Selden. First, it does not achieve the purpose of principle, it can not even help explain why his patients against the psychotherapist, let alone to explain the revolt had died hundreds of years of human psychology. Second, the so-called psychohistory case studies carried out during that period, while Asimov clear that prophecy is valid for groups. Third, and worst point, the psychological history did not predict anything to. It has been a conclusion brought something, a story rationalization.
1981 When I accepted the challenge Elder, to develop a time machine, Asimov's ideas still buried deep in my heart, so I'm going to use content analysis to identify those unable or unwilling to accept the survey people's explanatory style. But there is a large group of people can not accept the questionnaire had died, their actions affect history. I told Elder, CAVE technology was what he dreamed of "time machine." I suggest that not only can apply it to contemporary people who do not want to take the test can also be used in people who have died. We just need them loyal dictation. As long as they are available, we can find out their explanatory style. I also pointed out that this type of material is very extensive, autobiography, wills, press releases, audio tapes, diaries, medical records, from the front to return the Letter, appreciation speech and so on. "Elder," I said, "we can study the history of psychology."
After all, we do have three necessary conditions for Selden said. First, we have a valuable psychological principles, optimistic explanatory style can predict the ability to resist depression can predict high achievement, stoic nature. Second, we have a valid interpretation of the style of living or deceased measurement method. Third, our sample size is large enough.
One spring morning in 1983, I explained the contents of the above 21-year-old university student Zuluo (Harold Zullow), his thinking, originality, energy is first class. I hope to convince him to be my guest State University graduate student.
"? You considered this method to use it politically," he said: "Maybe we can predict the election I bet the Americans want to have an optimistic leader, a man told them that the problem must be solved, not. what are holding a suspect attitude. you need a lot of subjects you? how do American voters this group? you can not predict the vote of every voter, but perhaps we can predict a group of voters. we can publish from candidates in politics find their optimistic situation, and then to predict who will win. "
I'm glad he used the word" we ", because it means he will be the guest state universities. Sure enough, he came to the University of Pennsylvania, and in the next five years, his amazing accomplishments. He became the first psychologist to predict historical events.
Presidential election: 1948-1984
American voters want, what kind of president? Optimism in the minds of American voters have a component of it?
We re-read modern times elected president and losers nomination speech. There is optimism and not optimistic about the differences immediately emerged. Let's see Stevenson (Adlai Stevenson) for the first time to accept his appreciation speech at the Democratic nomination in 1952 (Stevenson twice run for president have failed).
"When the noise and shouting stopped, when the band departed, when the lights go out, at this historic moment, the responsibility naked in front of us this is a moment of internal and external: internal, materialism and all kinds of infighting ghosts haunt us; outside, full of unscrupulous power struggle internationally. "
Stevenson is indeed a scholar, his speech is full of bad things and the analysis of these events, but he did not propose any way to change these bad events. Here is his explanation style.
"20 century, the bloodiest since the coming of Christ, the most turbulent era is not over yet. Sacrifice, patience and reconciliation will be difficult to target full of our lives in many years to come ......"
"I ask not for your nomination I was a presidential candidate, because sitting on the seat that the pressure beyond anyone's imagination. "
His style has a permanent interpretation: suffering will be very long, it will cause sacrifice. But also universal: the burden that he did not dare to go to the wish of the presidential nomination. Stevenson, a very smart man, but in an emotional black hole. His explanatory style is depression.
Eisenhower (Dwight D.Eisenhower) and Stevenson's speeches are very different. Eisenhower twice became Stevenson's opponent, his style of interpretation in ruminant rarely, optimism is high, and full of action. Listen Eisenhower accepted the Republican nomination speeches (he was about to go to North Korea).
"Today is the first day of our war."
"The road leading to the Nov. 4 full of thorns, in this challenge, I will go all out, without reservation."
"I have attended many battles, habits on the eve of the battle, to the camp to chat with my soldiers, to talk about things they care about, to talk about our great responsibility. "
Eisenhower's speeches did not Stevenson's elegant, subtle, and pay close attention, but Eisenhower won the 1952 and 1956 elections. Of course, he is a World War II hero, his opponent's qualifications compared with him is really trivial. Historians believe that no one comparable to Eisenhower's reputation. In fact, Republicans and Democrats are fighting him their candidate. So Eisenhower optimism and pessimism Stevenson exactly with the results of the election have nothing to do with it? We think there is.
If a presidential candidate than his opponent pessimistic, and have a habit of rumination, what then? We think there will be three negative effects.
First, this gloomy candidate would be more passive, less the number of campaign speeches, and fewer will immediately counter-attack each other.
Second, voters are less like him. A well-controlled experiments have shown that people will avoid people with depression together, but also more depressed people do not like.
Third, the more pessimistic candidate less likely to arouse hope voters. Pessimist despair permanent and universal evaluation will make people do unfortunate incident.
These three results together, we can predict pessimistic candidate will lose the election.
To validate our view that the degree of optimism candidates would affect his election results, we need to find a reference point, at this point, the two candidates of speech must be compared with each other, but also with previous candidate compared speech. Such a comparison is most appropriate when acceptance speech, speech in this speech, the candidate must outline a blueprint for the future country.
We collected since 1948, a total of 10 nominations for the president's speeches, to which all sentences related to causation are on the hook out, they are randomly arranged, and then take the matter without the knowledge of the score, calculate their optimism with CAVE fraction. In addition, we will not comment or analysis of events but did not mention how to solve sentences are to find out, all divided by the number of sentences, draw a proportion of rumination. We also sentences with action-oriented done statistics, calculate the candidate mentioned that he once did or how he was ready to do the percentage share of the sentence in the whole book Speeches. We explain rumination score style points plus get a score, we call it "sad Chu" (pessrum). The higher the score sad Chu, the candidate's explanatory style worse.
When we compare 1948--1984 of this 40-year period when every election sad Chu score two presidential candidates, we first discovered that 10 times out of nine low score of sad Chu who elected. We only see the contents of their speech, they must also be able to predict accurate than polls!
So win or lose with the magnitude of the gap between the two candidates Chu sad about it? A great relationship. People win big gap magnitude is large: if two candidates optimistic points just short of winning or losing only narrowly.
Wait. Which one first? It is optimistic or leader? Is optimistic think they will win so that voters cast him, or because he has been leading so optimistic? Optimism is the leading cause of it, or leading results?
To clarify this point the best way is to look at those candidates come from behind. When they started this race, polls show they lag behind rivals, sometimes behind a lot. In 1948, Truman (Harry S.Truman) behind Dewey (Thomas E.Dewey) 13%, but much lower his pessimistic scores Bidu Wei, finally Truman to support the rate of 4.6% advantage over Dewey, below the all people's glasses. In 1960, Kennedy Nixon behind than 6.4%, but much lower scores than Nixon Kennedy's sad Chu that he is much more optimistic than Nixon, his vote than Nixon more than 0.2%, which is the closest ever election, the real win.
We can count up the lead, and the candidate for the incumbent president when the two factors controlling early polls, because they make optimistic grade inflation. When the control of these two factors, we see that there is still optimistic about the effect, but the main effect. Sad Chu score determines the magnitude of winning or losing, but also to predict more prospective than other factors.
Why is optimistic voters like candidates, there may be three reasons: optimist election campaign more dynamic; voters do not like the pessimist; optimism can bring hope. For the second method and we did not directly measure the third. For the first item, we calculated the seven elections went every day during the campaign each candidate - that is how they put the election. As we predicted, the more optimistic candidate more places to go, he was more interested, more investment, campaign harder.
Candidates of speech is usually someone else's ghost, and has repeatedly modified. So, in the end it is the optimism reflects a candidate, or to reflect the degree of optimism ghost writer do? From a certain point of view, it does not matter. The optimistic forecast is based on the analysis actually impressed voters how to vote for the candidates will only, as this impression is true or out of shape does not matter. But from another point of view, how did the candidates on the very kind of relationship, very important. Make the point in a way that is relatively speaking reporters conferences and public debates candidates, because this case is less scripted, usually it reflects their ideas. We have analyzed the open debate of the presidential election four times, four times this election, sad Chu score better candidate debate performance is relatively good.
Then I Speeches and reporter for the conference of six manuscript score of world leaders, then find their explanatory style. Very powerful, I found them from a scripted speech to reporters conference impromptu speech, there is a fairly stable characteristics, prior written speeches and impromptu press conference to answer reporters both universal and permanent very consistent. The personification of the scores show a different, but this change is a constant, in other words, personal interpretation, such as who should be responsible, more subtle in a formal speech, something to cover up, and in the correspondent conference is often natural to show it , more reckless.
My conclusion is that, with or without people ghost speak, speech can reflect the character of the speaker. However, there is one exception, and that is Dukakis (Michael Dukakis).
Presidential election: 1900-1944
We decided to test whether we have 10 9 predicted the correct result by chance? We have read the campaign contributions since 1900, and analyzed their explanatory style and rumination. This increases the 12 presidential election material.
We see the same results, election 12 times 9 times is sad Chu score better candidate win, and win the magnitude associated with the gap between the two scores. In addition the three exceptions are very interesting. The three exceptions are Roosevelt's re-election, Roosevelt won every time find many, although he Bilan Deng (Alfred Landon), Wilkie (Wendell Willky) and Dewey are pessimistic. We believe that these three elections, voters affected by the performance of Roosevelt's response to the crisis, but his opponents were not affected Speeches desired degree.
In 1900--22 presidential election in 1984, 18 times the American people have chosen optimistic candidate. In all elections, but that turned out not to be optimistic about the accident's come from behind, they are more optimistic candidate. Winning or losing the magnitude of the gap between the two candidates associated with the sad Chu fraction of optimism beyond the more opponents who win greater magnitude.
After successfully predicted history, Zuluo predict the future and I think the time is ripe.
Using psychology to predict the future
Psychohistory is used to "post-test" (postdict) events, which uses an earlier ago to predict what has since happened. Sven-Goran Eriksson as toilet training with Luther to "predict" the future he does not bow to the authority of the religious revolution. There's nothing surprises. If we already know the result, we have considerable room to find the reason leading to this result.
In the 22th presidential election in our analysis, we already know who won, although we try to be impartial analysis, and can not find an insider to score, but more clever raters are likely to guess the speech of people. Only like Selden as depicted, can predict the future, psychohistory to arouse interest, it will not make people question the method.
Upon completion of 1900-- after the 1984 presidential election analysis, we can finally go to predict the 1988 presidential election. Before we never had any sociologist predicted major event in history.
We decided to make predictions in three areas: the first is the pre-selection, predicting who will be the nominee of the two parties; the second is who will win the election; third is to predict election results 33 senators. We immediately started collecting speeches of all candidates.
Super-accurate prediction of primaries
January 1988, 13 presidential candidates began running around, expression of political opinion. There are six Republican candidates, including Bush (George Bush) and Dole (Robert Dole) poll closer. Many people think that Bush would lose, because Dole and Bush's tough weak. But evangelist Robertson (PatRobertson), conservative Kemp (Jack Kemp) and Haig (Alexander Haig) General strength can not be overlooked.
The Democratic Party is promising everyone, all uncertain, Central Plains were a lot of, I do not know who the winner. Hart (GaryHart) seems to have recovered from a sex scandal in the last, again leading in the polls. Senator Simon (PaulSimon), Massachusetts Governor Dukakis, Senator Al Gore (AlbertGore), and Rep. Gephardt (Richard Gephardt) are considered promising, and black priest Jackson (Jesse Jackson) is considered only get black votes.
"New York Times" to every candidate's campaign speeches published draft out, we use this technology to analyze CAVE 13 contenders speechwriter, score, draw our forecast. In a February weekend before the Iowa primaries, Zuluo insisted that we should put our forecast results in a sealed envelope, sent to the "New York Times", and put a Department of Psychology Department at the University of Pennsylvania there, in order to avoid what if our prediction, but no one believes. "If we're right," Zuluo sure to say: "I do not want people to say that we are an afterthought."
Our forecast is not ambiguous. Among the Democratic candidates, Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis was the most prominent leader in his grief Chu scores better by a mile than others (most optimistic). Hart is the worst, the Colorado senator was like a depression. Jackson scores sad Chu is also good, which shows that he has the potential to be a dark horse. Dukakis really won, and Hart in last place, withdrew from the election. Jackson is shocking, stand out in Iowa.
In the Republican Party, sad Chu score布什比多尔much better, in fact,布什比杜卡Keith optimistic, while the gap between the gap between Dole and Bush比杜卡基斯and Hart also large. We believe Dole would quit soon. Robertson and Haig is in last place, but sad Chu Haig was the highest score (which is the most pessimistic), we believe that Robertson will not have any progress, while Haig is entirely without hope.
The results Bush easily defeated Dole, but Robertson did not amount to anything, but Haig was the biggest loser, even on behalf of a seat are not secure, and had to withdraw from the election.
In early May, after the dust settles primaries, Zuluo told me to sit down, he sealed envelope in early February compared with the predicted results of the primaries, I could hardly believe my eyes: simply absolutely correct!
Gamble
After the 25 states of the primaries, "New York Times" called us. Zuluo send the sealed envelope deposit certificates reporter who wrote a story, how to introduce our forecast was accurate. "We put it on the front page!" He said, and asked us who will win the election. We then try to think of ways outright. From our analysis, the Bush win Dukakis 6%, because Bush is clearly much more optimistic比杜卡基斯. But I do not want this to predict, mainly because the predictions are based on the analysis of the speech when accepting the party nomination, rather than speeches during the primaries; in addition, we also feel Bush speeches concerning causation the sentence is not a lot.
Zuluo touches another reason for concern. Democrats and Republicans have come to us and want us to disclose the method of scoring. Zuluo said he did not care reporters surrounded him, but he was concerned that a candidate. If they use our principles to rewrite the speech, he said voters want to hear, then how do? As a result, we forecast the election is invalid.
I told him not to worry (though I'd be a bit worried), American politicians are very stubborn, not really pay attention to our research. I say that even I can not believe this prediction, so I want to campaign headquarters did not seem to us to rewrite campaign text. I propose to study the information sent to Democrats and Republicans, our study is open, as candidates have the right to know with people.
One night in July, Zuluo and I sat in my living room listening to Dukakis speech broadcast live. Dukakis heard this speech very seriously, he even President Kennedy's speechwriter re-enlisted out for him ghost. We sat, pencil in hand, waiting for the calculation and interpretation of ruminant Dukakis-style sentences.
When halfway through, I whispered to Zuluo said: "It's crazy if he continues to go on like this, no one has won him!."
"It is to rekindle the spirit of innovation and courage of the Americans, we want to defeat sorrow economy into a promising economy, every American to display their talent to build one of the finest United States of America!"
This is simply crazy! This is the most optimistic recent speech accepting the nomination. The speech比杜卡基斯speech before more optimistic. Americans are very fond of this figure of speech, Dukakis's popularity since the Democratic nominating convention ahead a lot.
So Bush has no chance to behave比杜卡基斯better? We finally come to the end of August, to listen to the Republican nominating convention speeches. It really is a super-optimistic speeches, explanatory style temporary, specific and Bush are strong.
Bush's sad Chu scores in recent years can be said to be the best, but still not as Dukakis July speech. We sad Chu score set into our formula (incumbent advantage and the impact poll also into consideration), and then calculate their advantages and disadvantages. According to their speeches, we predict that Dukakis would win, but win no more than about 3%.
I never gamble before, but this looks like Wynn, so I called the Las Vegas casinos, but they said it was not legitimate. In the US gambling which person will win the US presidential election is not legitimate, they advised me to try the UK.
In early September I happened to have a speech in Scotland, I left a few pounds, ready to bring charges Dukakis treasure. A friend took me to a one to run, to get ready to bet on casino revenue, because Bush's Republican nominating convention after the prestige higher than Dukakis, so I get the odds are 6︰5, so I made a note.
When I returned to Philadelphia, I told Zuluo I bet, and offered to share his point. Zuluo said he might not want to, he's like a high octave voice has a cold chill to my spine. He said that in July we heard not really Dukakis, he is not as optimistic speech in July from after Labor Day speech, Zuluo began to suspect that Dukakis nomination acceptance speech reflected the writer is optimistic ingredients. Or worse, they deliberately put it in line with written form of low sad Chu, Zuluo said he wanted to wait until after the first public debate decide whether or not to bet on his graduate scholarship.
In the US presidential election in the past four we have a public debate, in nominating candidates sad sad Chu Chu score good points in the public debate is also better. But this time is different. Looks worried Zuluo is justified, sad Chu score Dukakis sharp decline from the nominating convention, fell into grief when Chu fraction of primaries with him. Bush is very stable, showing比杜卡基斯more optimistic explanatory style.
After the first televised debate between Bush and Dukakis, Zuluo said he was not prepared to accept a favor to me, to my bet. Zuluo is right, in July of speech is not a true Dukakis. Polls seem to reflect this, Bush's popularity soared, the gap between the two is growing.
When the second televised debate, Dukakis sad Chu fraction of appalling. When asked why he can not promise to make ends meet, he said: "I think we both can not do this, we can not predict what will happen next." He believes that the problem is permanent, uncontrollable ( At least not Dukakis they can control). It also pessimistic than his words in September. Later Dukakis's speech has been in this style, whereas Bush is optimistic all the way down.
The next election largely reflects the same sad Chu gap. We stared at all the way the two campaigns, to the beginning of October, we feel Dukakis seems to have in mind to give up. To the end of October, we will debate the scores and scores entire autumn campaign speeches set into our calculation formula, resulting in a final prediction: Bush won 9.2%.
When the November election, Bush won Dukakis 8.2%.
Senator election forecast
In 1988 there were 33 re-election to the Senate, we have collected 29 bipartisan candidate speeches, most of them are published in their declared his candidacy, because this time are still far away from the real election day, so sad Chu scores the gap with the polls ahead or behind does not matter. The day before the election, Zuluo these 29 candidates made a last sad Chu analysis, in a sealed envelope, sent several of impartial members of society.
Not only do we correctly predicted 25 senators elected, but we also correctly predicted all of the black horse, and the gap between the votes.
So, we just interpret the speech of style as well as their degree of rumination predicted the results of the presidential election primaries, presidential elections, and 29 senators. Our forecast for primaries entirely successful, bipartisan correctly predicted winners and losers. Presidential election prediction is half wrong half right, I lost the bet Britain, but Zuluo think Dukakis speech at the nomination is not an authentic Dukakis, who through their fall predicted Bush's victory speech . Election of senators we have 86%, we correctly predicted every win and the dark horse, no one is more powerful than us.
This is the only time I know social scientists can accurately predict significant historical events before the event occurs.
Good start
Used to be called psychohistory and Seldon imagined far. It can not "predict", only "post-test", but also cheated; it can only rebuild one's life, rather than the behavior of a group of people. It uses the principles of psychology is very problematic, and not to apply any statistical tools.
Psychological history in our hands was reborn. We can predict the results of a major event. When we "post-test", we do not cheat. We try to predict the behavior of a large group of people - the result of the voting electorate. We have established a real, rational and effective psychological principles, and the use of appropriate statistical tools.
But this is only a start, it makes the future psychologists do not have to limit yourself then there is a problem in laboratory studies of population studies or expensive to validate their theories. Historical documents verify become fertile land, predicting the future can be a better way to verify the theory.
We hope that Selden would be proud.
Proverbs optimism
Psychological history in our hands to get born again, we can predict the results of a major event.
We predict the behavior of a large group of people - the result of the voting electorate. We have established a real, rational and effective psychological principles, and the use of appropriate statistical tools.