Russian Federation
UDC 324
The aim of this article is to identify the epistemic and psychological mechanisms underlying the transformation of voters' deepest political convictions in the context of digitalized political communication. The study draws on an interdisciplinary approach integrating concepts from political philosophy, rhetorical theory, epistemological methods, and political psychology. Particular attention is paid to the typology of political statements (facts, forecasts, counterfacts, values, opinions, and hopes) and their role in persuasion. The methodological basis is an expert survey of members of the Russian Association for Electoral Digital Politics, using a Likert scale to quantify key points. The results confirm the expert consensus regarding the decisive role of voters' subjective perceptions of reality (M=4.73; σ =0.46) and the fundamental influence of artificial intelligence technologies on the nature of political discourse (M=4.73; σ =0.46). The limitations of fact-checking and the dominance of value-based statements over fact-based ones are recognized. The greatest polarization of opinions is caused by the potential of digitalization in reconstructing voters' "worldviews" and the applicability of microtargeting in the Russian context. It is concluded that the integration of epistemological, rhetorical, and psychometric approaches is a promising tool for personalized political communication. The theoretical significance of this study lies in its development of an interdisciplinary approach (epistemology, rhetorical theory, and political psychology). The author proposes a typology of political narratives, differentiating them by their epistemic status (facts, forecasts, values, counterfactual), which deepens our understanding of the nature of political discourse and the mechanisms of voter persuasion. The practical significance of this study is confirmed by the results of an expert survey, as the proposed integration of rhetorical models and psychometric methods (microtargeting) opens up opportunities for developing effective personalized political communication strategies. Understanding the subjective worldview of voters allows for more accurate communication of a political campaign's program and also optimizes resources by focusing on audience segments where persuasion is most likely. Conclusions regarding the impact of AI and deepfakes (expert consensus M=4.73) provide a vector for developing new methods for verifying information in the context of increasing technological transformation.
political persuasion, discourse, values, microtargeting, subjective perception, rhetoric, digitalization, artificial intelligence
1. Ayzenk H. Psihologiya politiki. per. s angl. V. Egorova. Moskva: Mysl'. 2016. - 392 s.
2. Bol'shakov S.N. Politicheskaya kommunikaciya kak faktor demokratii i upravleniya problemami // Rossiya v policentrichnom mirovom poryadke: vyzovy i novye paradigmy razvitiya: Materialy H Vserossiyskogo kongressa politologov RAPN s mezhdunarodnym uchastiem, Moskva, 05–07 dekabrya 2024 goda. – Moskva: OOO "Aspekt Press". 2024. – S. 89-90.
3. Vagina V.V. Problema izucheniya obrazov politicheskih ob'ektov v politicheskoy psihologii // Voprosy nacional'nyh i federativnyh otnosheniy. – 2020. – T. 10. - № 9 (66). – S. 2303-2312.
4. Gorbatov D.S., Beznosov D.S., Bol'shakov S.N. [i dr.]. Neformal'nye massovye kommunikacii kak instrument social'nyh manipulyaciy. Sankt-Peterburg: Sankt-Peterburgskiy gosudarstvennyy institut psihologii i social'noy raboty. 2022. – 260 s.
5. Eremeev S.G., Bol'shakov S.N. Pravitel'stvennaya kommunikaciya v sisteme politicheskogo upravleniya. Opyt Shvecii // Voprosy politologii. – 2023. – T. 13. - № 5(93). – S. 2037-2049.
6. Zabrodnaya E.Yu. Psihologiya politicheskogo liderstva i upravleniya // Liderstvo i vyzovy sovremennosti: Materialy I Mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferencii, Moskva, 26 aprelya 2023 goda. – Moskva: NOChU VO «Moskovskiy institut psihoanaliza». 2023. – S. 184-192.
7. Kryukova E.V. Politicheskaya psihologiya i politicheskaya ideologiya kak urovni politicheskoy kul'tury sovremennoy Rossii: osobennosti i protivorechiya // Voprosy nacional'nyh i federativnyh otnosheniy. - 2022. - T. 12. - № 4 (85). - S. 1324-1329.
8. Rakityanskiy N.M. Politicheskaya psihologiya v Rossii. Refleksivnoe esse // Informacionnye voyny. - 2022. - № 4 (64). - S. 39-47.
9. Bitzer L.F. The Rhetorical Situation. In J.L. Lucaites, C.M. Condit, S. Caudill (Eds.)// Contemporary Rhetorical Theory: A Reader. Guilford Publications. -1998. - pp. 217–225.
10. Blanchette I., Richards A. The Influence of Affect on Higher Level Cognition: A Review of Research on Interpretation, Judgement, Decision Making and Reasoning. Cognition & Emotion. -2010.- №24 (4). - R. 561–595.
11. Burke K. A rhetoric of motives. University of California Press. - 1969.- 212 r.
12. Burke K.A Rhetoric of Motives. London: University of California Press Ltd.-1969. -274 r.
13. Casal Bértoa F., Rama J. Polarization: what do we know and what can we do about it? // Frontiers in Political Science. - 2021. - T. 3. - S. 687-695.
14. Constans J.I. Worry Propensity and the Perception of Risk//Behaviour Research and Therapy. - 2001. - № 39. - r. 721–729.
15. Damasio A. Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain. Putnam Publishing. - 2006. – 178 r.
16. Dimock M., Doherty C., Kiley J., Oates R. Political Polarization in the American Public. Pew Research Center. - 2014. - 310 r.
17. Eysenck M.W., Calvo M.G. Anxiety and Performance: The Processing Efficiency Theory// Cognition and Emotion. - 1992. - R. 409-434.
18. Eysenck M.W., Mogg K., May J., Richards A., Mathews A. Bias in Interpretation of Ambiguous Sentences Related to Threat in Anxiety//Journal of Abnormal Psychology. - 1991. - № 100. - r. 144–150.
19. Goodwin M., Hix S., Pickup M. For and Against Brexit: A Survey Experiment of the Impact of Campaign Effects on Public Attitudes Toward EU Membership// British Journal of Political Science. – 2018. R. 1–15.
20. Groskopf C. European Politics Is More Polarized than Ever, and These Numbers Prove // Available at: https://qz.com/645649/european-politics-is-more-polarized-than-ever-and-these-numbers-prove-it (data obrascheniya: 09.02.2026).
21. Madsen J.K., Bailey R.M., Pilditch T. Large Networks of Rational Agents Form Persistent Echo Chambers. Scientific Reports. 2018. – №8. – rp.123-191.
22. Madsen J.K. Approaching Persuasion // In: The Psychology of Micro-Targeted Election Campaigns. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. 2019. R. 110-134.
23. Mann T.E., Ornstein N. J. It’s Even Worse Than It Looks: How the American Constitutional Systems Collided with the New Politics of Extremism. New York: Basic Books. – 2012. – 282 r.
24. Moraes J.A. The Electoral Basis of Ideological Polarization in Latin America. Working Paper, Kellogg Institute for International Studies. – 2015. – 175 r.
25. Oaksford M., Morris F., Grainger B., Williams J.M. G. Mood, Reasoning, and Central Executive Processes// Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition. – 1996.- № 22. – R. 476–492.
26. Plato. Gorgias, Menexenus, Protagoras (M. Schofield, Ed.). Cambridge University Press. – 2008 – 610 r.
