ABSTRACT
Researchers might assume that neutrality does not shape thought and action because it signals that nothing in the environment needs attention, hence a person has little need to alter their behavior. However, feeling neutral about an issue might be consequential. The COVID-19 pandemic was a major issue during the 2020 U.S. presidential election. We examined whether feeling neutral about COVID-19 was associated with attitudes about the top 2 presidential candidates (Trump vs. Biden) and behavior (i.e., whether a person voted and who they voted for). Data were collected at 2 critical time points: Study 1 was conducted immediately after the U.S. presidential election and Study 2 was conducted prior to the second Senate impeachment trial of Trump. Because feeling neutral about COVID-19 might indicate that a person views the issue as unworthy of attention, a perspective more aligned with Trump's approach, we hypothesized that feeling neutral about COVID-19 would be associated with more pro-Trump attitudes and behaviors. Even after accounting for other affects about COVID-19, in both studies, neutrality was associated with more favorable attitudes toward Trump, less favorable attitudes toward Biden, being less likely to vote, and if a person did vote, being more likely to vote for Trump. In Sudy 2, neutrality was associated with less support for impeaching Trump. Overall, in contrast to the view that neutral affect exerts little influence, neutrality can be critically intertwined with thought and action. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).