Can Elections Cause Post-Traumatic Stress? Findings from the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election

What you need to know

• The 2020 U.S. presidential election may have caused post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms in some voters
• An estimated 12.5% of American adults experienced election-related PTSD symptoms, much higher than typical PTSD rates
• People with more negative views of the opposing political party reported higher levels of election-related PTSD symptoms
• The study suggests elections could potentially be traumatic experiences for some voters

Elections and mental health

Most of us think of elections as normal, if sometimes stressful, political events. But new research suggests that for some people, elections may actually be traumatic experiences that can lead to symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

PTSD is a mental health condition that can develop after experiencing or witnessing a traumatic event. It’s often associated with things like combat, natural disasters, or violent assaults. But this study indicates that a contentious election could potentially cause PTSD-like symptoms in some voters.

The researchers surveyed 573 American adults shortly after the 2020 U.S. presidential election. They used a modified version of a standard PTSD screening questionnaire, adapting it to ask specifically about election-related symptoms.

High rates of election-related PTSD symptoms

The results were striking. An estimated 12.5% of American adults experienced symptoms consistent with election-related PTSD. This is much higher than the typical annual rate of PTSD in the U.S. population, which is around 3.5%.

“We were surprised by how high the rates were,” said lead researcher Dr. Timothy Fraser. “It suggests the election may have been a genuinely traumatic experience for a significant portion of voters.”

The study found similar rates of election-related PTSD symptoms among both Democrats (13.5%) and Republicans (15%). Independents had somewhat lower rates at 7.5%.

Negative partisanship linked to higher PTSD symptoms

One of the key factors associated with higher levels of election-related PTSD symptoms was something researchers call “affective polarization” or negative partisanship. This refers to having very negative views and feelings toward members of the opposing political party.

“The more negatively someone viewed supporters of the other party, the more likely they were to report PTSD-like symptoms related to the election,” explained Dr. Fraser.

This association held true even after the researchers accounted for many other factors like demographics, personality traits, and which candidate the person voted for.

Why might elections cause trauma?

The researchers suggest a few reasons why the 2020 election in particular may have been traumatic for some voters:

• High levels of partisan hostility and division
• Concerns about election violence or a peaceful transfer of power
• Questioning of the election’s legitimacy by some groups
• The high-stakes nature of the election for many voters

Dr. Costas Panagopoulos, one of the study authors, noted: “For some people, their political beliefs are a core part of their identity. An electoral loss, or perceived attacks on their party, can feel like a very personal affront.”

The researchers emphasize that not everyone who finds elections stressful will develop PTSD symptoms. But for some, the combination of high emotional investment and a hostile political climate may create the conditions for genuine psychological trauma.

Other factors linked to election-related PTSD

The study identified several other factors associated with higher rates of election-related PTSD symptoms:

• Younger age
• Lower income
• Being married
• Higher levels of political participation
• Lower psychological resilience
• Certain personality traits like higher neuroticism

Interestingly, the researchers did not find significant differences based on gender, race, or education level.

Implications and future research

This study opens up new questions about the potential mental health impacts of elections and political polarization. The researchers suggest a few key takeaways:

1. Election-related trauma may be more common than previously recognized. Mental health professionals should be aware of this possibility when treating patients.

2. Extremely negative attitudes toward political opponents may be harmful to mental health. Finding ways to reduce affective polarization could have public health benefits.

3. Efforts to make elections less adversarial and traumatic may be needed. This could include things like reducing inflammatory rhetoric or strengthening confidence in election integrity.

The study does have some limitations. It relied on self-reported symptoms rather than clinical diagnoses. And it’s possible that the unique circumstances of the 2020 election, including the COVID-19 pandemic, influenced the results.

“We need more research to understand if these high rates of election-related PTSD symptoms are unique to 2020 or if they occur in other elections as well,” said Dr. Kevin Smith, another of the study authors.

Future studies could look at election-related trauma in other countries and election cycles. Researchers could also investigate whether certain interventions might help reduce election-related PTSD.

Conclusions

• Elections may be more psychologically impactful than previously recognized, potentially causing PTSD-like symptoms in some voters
• Having very negative views of opposing political parties is associated with higher risk of election-related trauma
• More research is needed on the mental health effects of elections and political polarization
• Finding ways to make elections less traumatic could have public health benefits

While elections are a cornerstone of democracy, this research suggests they may come with unintended psychological costs for some voters. Understanding and mitigating these effects could be important for both individual and societal wellbeing.