Improving the language of influence

Abstract

We show that the language used by U.S. presidential candidates over the past twenty years has an underlying temporal structure associated with electoral success, with the most influential language used by incumbents in their second campaign and the least by losers in a first-cycle open campaign. Influential language is characterized by increased positivity, complete absence of negativity, increased abstraction, and lack of reference to the opposing candidate(s). The way in which language use changes suggests that it is the result of changing self-perception rather than a deliberate strategy. This has implications for the language of influence as deployed by violent extremist groups, suggesting that both success at convincing an audience to participate in violent extremism and the presence of competing groups trying to make similar arguments improve the quality of the influencing language they use.