Although George W. Bush won the 2004 Presidential election against John F. Kerry, a widely-held view is that Senator Kerry prevailed in the pre-election debates. Most people would probably argue that Kerry won those debates on the basis of substance. However, at least one person, Peter Collett, a British social psychologist, believes that a contributing factor to Kerry’s perceived victory was the “left-side advantage”.
In all 3 pre-election debates, from the audience’s perspective, Kerry enters the stage from the left, Bush from the right. The 2 candidates meet in the middle, and shake hands. Basically, Collett is saying that Kerry made a better 1st impression because “the more arm that is showing, the more powerful the body language signal. The person on the left shows their entire right arm, while the person on the right has their arm partially or completely blocked by the arm of the other, depending on the viewing angle”. A corollary is that most people base their opinion of another person on the first 10-15 seconds of their encounter.
I have no idea if Collett’s seemingly superficial analysis is right or not, but just in case, you might want to keep to the left in your next photo-op.
Collett is the author of “The Book of Tells”, a book about body language. A review of that book can be found here.
Related posts:
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
I wonder if Kerry would’ve won the election if he’d been able to show more leg.
Forgive my ranting, but I think political debates are no longer worthwhile. They never reveal much, and candidates just reiterate their talking points for 90 minutes. What would Lincoln and Douglass think?