Fighting back

With the presidential election just eight months away, voters and grassroots volunteers across the land are lining up behind their chosen candidates. Participation in the political process is one of the perks of citizenship — but is it more than that? Could it be good for your mental health?

Lynn Sanders, an associate professor in politics, has studied the relationship between political involvement and psychological well-being. Her findings point to a crucial relationship: making your voice heard in the political realm could offset depression.

“It has to do with what we call ‘political efficacy,’” she said. “It’s the idea that one can do something to improve one’s political situation.”

The path Sanders followed to connect depression and politics was long and winding, but a pivotal moment came when she read “Black Sun,” a collection of essays on depression by Julia Kristeva. In an essay titled “The Life and Death of Speech,” Kristeva writes that “depressive persons ... neither act nor speak.”

Sanders decided to reverse that equation: “I thought, if depression is the loss of speech, could gaining speech reduce depression? This is the main question I’m trying to address.”

With fellowship support from the Scholars in Health Policy Research Program, Sanders tested her theory, relying on data from a long-running panel survey. The National Longitudinal Survey (NLS) is an ongoing study of six groups of men and women. Sanders focused on NLS Young Women, a group first interviewed at ages 14-24 in 1968 and interviewed 20 more times over the next 30 years. Sanders concentrated on the period between 1983 and 1993, because it was during that period that the survey carried the most extensive set of questions related to political involvement and mental health.

Sanders’ findings suggest that political participation does alleviate psychological distress, offsetting some of the problems that stem from disadvantaged social status. Women already prone to mental health problems seemed to benefit the most. (Though the survey focused on women, Sanders suggests that the results for men should be similar.)

Based on her research, she wrote a paper titled the “Psychological Benefits of Political Participation.” In the paper, Sanders looks at two different kinds of involvement: “participation in voluntary associations and participation in activities to address workplace discrimination.”

Psychologists have always linked communal involvement with psychological well-being, and Sanders’ research supports that notion. But she found that the more combative nature of political discourse is more beneficial for mental health.

“This is about connecting to institutions of power,” she said. “It’s about articulating a protest. The fighting part — that’s the key. Fighting back is more important that just taking part.”

But what if you lose the fight? Let’s say you get involved in the political process — you volunteer long hours at your candidate’s campaign headquarters — and your candidate loses the election? Can you still expect to feel better psychologically? “Yes, it should still work,” Sanders said. “Losing doesn’t take away from the positive effects of engagement. It’s still good to fight.”

As expected, though, the survey showed that siding with a winner brings you more pronounced psychological benefits. “There’s an additional positive effect when you win,” Sanders said. “It’s better to win.”

If political participation gives a boost to volunteers and voters, what about the most politically involved group of all — the politicians themselves? Sanders will leave that question to some other researcher; she doesn’t study politicians.

“They’re a class unto themselves,” she said. “They’re too unusual to make generalizations about. They all have narcissistic personality disorders of some sort. Besides,” she added, “they already have enough power.”

Sanders is putting a more theoretical spin on her research as she prepares a paper for presentation this month at a conference at the University of Chicago. Soon she hopes to partner with a clinician, secure more funding and delve back into the connection between political involvement and mental health, testing her theories further.

Though her research indicates that getting involved politically can help with mental health problems, Sanders is quick to point out that political participation is not a panacea for depression.

“This is not Prozac,” she said. “This is not the key variable in psychological well-being. I would never say that political involvement is the first thing to do if you have a mental health problem. First get help, get medicine.”