Pharisee Effect

The Pharisee Effect refers to a boomerang, or voter backlash, toward candidates who overuse religion as the basis of a political argument. The phenomenon derives its name from a New Testament passage (Luke 18:9–14) in which Jesus criticized a Pharisee for being too public with his prayers. The Pharisee's mistake is that his loud public prayers were intended to enhance his own image rather than being an honest expression of internal religious devotion. The Pharisees, it was argued, were so openly religious that they were subject to charges of insincerity and hypocrisy. Powell and Neiva argued that the same thing can occur with the use of political appeals in politics.

Theoretical discussion of the Pharisee Effect is grounded in game theory as developed by von Neumann and Morgenstern. A political campaign represents a specific application of a zero-sum game, since every vote gained for one competitor (+1) would be a vote lost for the opponent (-1). In the heat of a campaign, the candidates must constantly balance two conflicting tensions regarding that message escalation. The Pharisee Effect argues that such tensions are particularly important when the content of political messages is related to religion. In an electorate in which a majority of voters hold religious values, statements about religious issues can generate positive responses among voters. But, if they overdo it—if the religious messages is escalated to the point that it is viewed as excessive by the voters—the use of religious content has potential to boomerang on the message source.

Five attribution effects of the phenomenon have been identified that could cause voters to have a negative evaluation of the speaker's intention or motivation: (1) self-serving motivation, or intentionality, that is, the speaker uses a religious appeal for his or her own purposes rather than to promote a religious purpose; (2) deception, or hypocrisy, that is, the speaker is viewed as basing his appeal on a set of religious values that he himself does not personally hold; (3) inappropriateness, that is, the particularly religious arguments used by the rhetor are deemed inappropriate for public debates; (4) a perception of fanaticism on the part of the candidate; and (5) a perception that the candidate has an undesirable “holier-than-thou” attitude.

Examples of the Pharisee Effect in political campaigns include Jimmy Carter's “lust in the heart” statement in the 1976 campaign, George W. Bush's speech at Bob Jones University in the 2000 campaign, and—more recently—the defeat of Roy (“The Ten Commandments Judge”) Moore in the 2006 Alabama Republican primary for governor.