Studies differed by allowing open responses, with justifications, but the majority of Trump supporters responded that they simply did not believe the accusations against the North American president.
A set of three psychology studies concluded that many Donald Trump supporters resort to denial to deal with the serious accusations directed at the US president, such as allegations of sexual abuse, corruption and other behaviors considered immoral or even illegal.
According to joint work in Journal of Social and Political Psychologythere is a consistent pattern in the heads wearing MAGA hats. Faced with information that conflicts with their view of Trump, many reject the facts or divert attention to other topics, often without justifying themselves.
The first study was carried out in October 2019. It surveyed 128 American adults, who said they preferred Trump in the 2016 presidential elections, which led to the businessman’s first term. When asked how they reconciled their support for the Republican candidate with their accusations of sexual misconduct, more than half responded that they simply did not believe in the complaints.
The second study verified the same. It started in December 2019, two days after the House of Representatives voted on the first impeachment process against Donald Trump.
Researchers analyzed responses from 173 supporters of the MAGA movement. The majority once again directly denied the accusations, while others sought to change the subject and focus the discussion on the political decisions of the then president. About 15% explicitly stated that the topic did not interest them.
The third study is from 2022 and was carried out shortly after Trump’s formal indictment in connection with the January 6 attack on the Capitol: 187 participants were surveyed again and more than 60% considered the accusations made against the president to be false.
According to the authors of the studies, the denial of factual information can function as response to anxiety provoked by cognitive dissonance — the psychological discomfort that arises when someone confronts data that is incompatible with already installed beliefs or loyalties.
Lead author Cindy Harmon-Jones, senior lecturer in psychology at Western Sydney University, explained that the research was born out of bewilderment at the persistence of support for Trump despite the severity and number of public accusations. According to the researcher, the objective was to allow these supporters to explain, in their own words, why they continued to defend him, but that was not the result.
Unlike previous studies on cognitive dissonance, which typically gave participants only limited response options, these works relied on open-ended questions and gave greater freedom to justify positions.
Harmon-Jones points out that further investigation will be necessary to understand whether similar reactions would arise among supporters of other political figures, such as Barack Obama or Bill Clinton, if they faced comparable accusations.
