This week about 400 million EU people are invited to elect next EU Parliament members, but only one third of them is likely to vote. Abstentionism has precise cognitive and psychological justifications, and political communication aims at seizing and addressing them.
Latest Eurobarometer data for upcoming EU elections are quite clear: about 35% of European citizens is likely to vote, one third will probably pass over, one third is still uncertain. Italy usually has higher participation rates than other EU countries, but there is a tangible risk of experiencing a significant abstentionism growth. Apparently, StavoltaVoto and ‘Choose your future‘ campaigns by the EU Parliament haven’t been strong enough to reduce the distance from Europe to its people, or to make Millennials and Gen Z passionate about politics.
If abstentionism is normally referred to as a social phenomenon, it is possible to detect and analyze some cognitive and psychological elements impacting on individuals and their choice of voting, or not voting. “As the age of political ideology is over, nowadays voting decisions are not purely emotional. It’s rather a vote of reaction”, said Riccardo Bettiga, president of Ordine degli Psicologi della Lombardia, during a recent event about the psychology of voting.
When the vote is a reaction – meaning that kind of answer coming from the most ancient areas of human brain, where data processing is quicker, but more superficial – individual choices are highly volatile, thus very difficult to predict. This psychological dynamic comes in a scenario where trust in institutions is collapsing, and people look for recognizable leaders who are easier to be “consumed” via TV or social media. The ability to leverage distrust and related grudge is one of the reasons behind the consensus of Italian leaders such as Matteo Salvini, added Giovanni Diamanti, political storytelling expert.
How can this trend be inverted, or at least controlled? It isn’t easy, but professor Patrizia Catellani from Università Cattolica di Milano believes that politicians could learn something from psychology, as “people can trust politics only if they trust themselves”. She suggests to act first on reasons generating uncertainty and frustration at social and economic level, then work to improve critical thinking, both through education and a more responsible use of media and social media.
A new, different political communication is also needed to make closer and more visible what seems far and irrelevant (Greta Thunberg should have taught how to handle this). But Catellani encourages politicians not to step back from values: although somewhat blurred, they have not faded away. The anchoring to values is still present in any personal decision, including voting.
