ABSTRACT
This work drew on psycholinguistic research on the power of language in shaping emotions and policy preferences, exploring a subtle means of political persuasion. We proposed examining the impact of grammatical form in political communication—how hearing others assert their positions in verb versus noun form impacts the receiver’s anger and policy support regarding anti-refugee policies. We tested whether participants responded differently to a person arguing against governmental policies benefitting refugees, depending on the grammatical form of her arguments. 575 Jewish-Israelis, assigned to either noun or verb condition, read a prompt containing information about the refugee issue and watched a 2-min video of a woman expressing anti-refugee policy positions. Findings revealed that anti-refugee policies phrased in verb versus noun form increased levels of anger toward the government and, correspondingly, support of anti-refugee policies (not pro-refugee), suggesting that the grammatical form in which policies are presented can impact political persuasion.