The United States presidential debate: A lesson in the value of rehearsal

Like millions of people around the world, I watched the recent United States presidential campaign debate between Democratic nominee Kamala Harris and Republican nominee Donald Trump. And although the debate was a key component of the campaign from a political standpoint, as a psychologist I was intrigued by the role psychology played in the debate’s outcome.  ‘

What struck me the most the benefits of rehearsing and the costs of not rehearsing ahead of a challenging performance in front of audience. I think this factor played a pivotal role in the outcome of the debate. In the following sections, I will discuss the role that two kinds of rehearsal played in the debate’s outcome and how you can use rehearsal to facilitate success in debates and other challenging activities.

Cognitive rehearsal

There are two kinds of rehearsal which benefit performance—cognitive and emotional. Cognitive rehearsal is the rehearsing of lines and actions which an actor does before a play. In a debate, cognitive rehearsal involves practicing answers you want to give to questions from the moderators. It also entails anticipating comments and questions from your opponent and having responses to these.

Cognitive rehearsal benefits performance in two ways. The first way is obvious. You will perform better if you are able to deliver your points quickly and confidently compared to forgetting them or stumbling through them. Secondly, cognitive rehearsal benefits performance by lowering your performance anxiety to a manageable or even optimal level. The reason is that knowing your points cold means there is less anxiety from having to think of what you want to say in the middle of a high-pressure situation.

Emotional rehearsal

Emotional rehearsal entails preparing for events and behaviours which may elicit emotional reactions which can interfere with performance. In the case of a debate, emotional rehearsal would involve experiencing emotions associated with adversity such as not answering a question effectively. It would also involve having someone play the role of your opponent verbally attacking you. This role-playing is more effective in eliciting emotions like anger, frustration and anxiety if the person playing the role of your opponent uses the words, tone and volume of voice, facial expressions and body language which your opponent uses.

Like cognitive rehearsal, emotional rehearsal benefits performance in two ways. First, It gives you practice rebounding from adversity. For example, if you were unable to answer a debate question during rehearsal, you get practice in feeling emotions like anxiety, frustration and disappointment and quickly getting back on track in answering the next debate question.  If you don’t answer a question well during the debate itself, having experienced the same emotions in rehearsal will make them feel less daunting because of familiarity. You will also have confidence in moving on to your next point after experiencing these adversity-driven emotions because you have practiced doing so in rehearsal.

A second way emotional rehearsal benefits performance is through desensitization. Desensitization is a process in which the intensity of emotional reactions decreases the more we are exposed to stimuli which trigger those reactions.

In the case of a debate, having someone role-play your opponent to trigger emotions like anger, frustration and anxiety by delivering provocative comments allows you to get exposed to these emotions in advance of the debate. The more you get exposed to these emotions during rehearsal, the less intense you will feel them as desensitization occurs.

You then reap the benefits of desensitization during the performance. In the case of a debate, this means you are less likely to be triggered emotionally by your opponent’s comments and behaviours. This allows you to keep your composure and focus on delivering the points you want to get across.

Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.

How rehearsal affected the presidential debate

The Trump and Harris camps were open about the kind of preparation their candidates were doing leading up to the debate. Vice-President Harris was involved in intensive rehearsal. This included putting her through mock debates with steps taken to simulate the impending debate conditions. Someone played the role of Mr. Trump and a set was created to mimic the one on which the candidates would appear when the debate aired live on television. In contrast, former President Trump said he was not doing any debate rehearsal and even mocked Ms. Harris for the efforts she was putting into the process.

The difference between the two candidates in their debate preparation led to stark differences in their debate performance. The extensive cognitive rehearsal done by Ms. Harris led her to be better prepared to answer questions and more in command of her talking points compared with Mr. Trump. I thought that this difference in cognitive rehearsal leading to different performances was most evident when the candidates were discussing the abortion issue.

I thought that the difference in emotional rehearsal by the two candidates was most evident when they were answering questions about immigration, an issue which was a strength for Mr. Trump and a vulnerability for Ms. Harris entering the debate. Mr. Trump’s lack of emotional rehearsal cost him when he became visibly flustered hearing Ms. Harris invite people to come to his rallies to watch spectators leaving early out of boredom. Instead of answering the question on immigration, an angry Trump launched into a defensive diatribe focusing on his rally crowd sizes being greater than Ms. Harris’s. He then went off the rails with bizarre and baseless claims that Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio were eating cats and dogs.

Debate preparation with emotional rehearsal would have given Mr. Trump practice in getting triggered by comments about his rally crowd sizes and other matters. This would have made it easier for him to keep his composure and stay on his talking points when faced with such triggering comments at the debate. In contrast, Ms. Harris’s debate preparation allowed her to face the emotions associated with verbal barbs from her opponent. This allowed her to keep her composure and stay on her talking points when faced with this adversity during the debate.

Drawing lessons from the debate

The consensus among all but the most partisan observers was that Kamala Harris won the debate convincingly. That her victory stemmed largely from her having prepared much more than Donald Trump through cognitive and emotional rehearsal was compelling. The experience taught me that even an experienced public performer like Mr. Trump can underperform in a challenging public performance like a political debate if he has not prepared by doing cognitive and emotional rehearsal.

The message is clear: If you are faced with a similarly challenging public performance, spending time on rehearsal can make the difference between hitting a home run and striking out. Whether it is a debate, a speech, a sports competition, a job interview, an oral examination, a difficult conversation or a myriad of other challenging performances involving interacting with and/or being observed by others, doing cognitive and emotional rehearsal is pivotal to your success.

May you put in the time and effort to rehearse before your challenging performances,

-Dr. Pat

The post The United States presidential debate: A lesson in the value of rehearsal appeared first on Dr. Patrick Keelan, Calgary Psychologist.