Mind Games — The Science of Confidence in the Harris vs. Trump Election Clash

As we approach the 2024 U.S. election, two figures stand at the forefront: Kamala Harris and Donald Trump. Both have distinct leadership styles, but what differentiates them in terms of their ability to inspire confidence in an increasingly volatile and uncertain world? In a climate marked by VUCA—volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity—leaders are tasked not only with making decisions but also with projecting the kind of confidence that resonates with a diverse electorate.

While policies and platforms are crucial, the science behind leadership shows that how a candidate makes people feel plays an equally significant role in shaping perceptions. Voters, especially in uncertain times, seek leaders who can project certainty, stability, and control. Here’s where the neuroscience of confidence offers fascinating insights: how do Kamala Harris and Donald Trump measure up when we examine their ability to lead in the face of unpredictability through a neuroscientific lens?

What Is Neuroscience Confidence?

Confidence is not merely a matter of self-assurance or charisma; it is a deeply ingrained neurological state that can either foster or inhibit trust, emotional safety, and decision-making. Neuroscientific research shows that the brain's response to uncertainty is tied to both emotional and cognitive processes. When we encounter unpredictability, our brain's amygdala—the centre responsible for fear and threat detection—can become overactive, resulting in anxiety and stress. At the same time, the prefrontal cortex, which governs rational decision-making and planning, can be suppressed, leading to poor decision-making.

The key to leadership in uncertain times is finding ways to calm the amygdala and engage the prefrontal cortex—essentially, to help people think clearly and feel secure, even when the future is unclear. This is where the concept of neuroscience confidence comes in: leaders who can regulate their own emotions and influence the emotional states of others can project a calm, confident presence, even in the midst of chaos.

Kamala Harris: The Relational Leader

Kamala Harris has built her reputation on a leadership style grounded in empathy, collaboration, and emotional connection. Neuroscientifically, her strength lies in activating the social brain—the neural circuits responsible for processing empathy, trust, and social bonding. By fostering psychological safety and promoting inclusivity, Harris helps to reduce the threat response in the brain, allowing for greater clarity of thought and collaborative problem-solving.

One notable example of this is Harris' emphasis on unity and inclusivity. Her statements like, "We are all in this together, and we will overcome," and, “The American dream belongs to all of us,” reinforce the idea of shared purpose and collective resilience. These words signal a leadership style that lowers the anxiety response in her audience’s brains by fostering connection and togetherness, activating the brain’s reward systems tied to social bonding.

In leadership, psychological safety refers to creating an environment where people feel they can speak up, take risks, and offer ideas without fear of punishment. Neuroscience shows that when this safety is present, the brain's prefrontal cortex becomes more engaged, allowing individuals to think critically, solve problems creatively, and approach challenges with resilience. Harris' focus on inclusivity and her ability to connect with a broad spectrum of voters align with this concept, as she works to create a sense of collective identity and purpose.

However, Harris has at times faced criticism for lacking assertiveness in key moments, particularly when facing high-pressure situations. Neuroscience tells us that when leaders are perceived as indecisive, it can trigger an overactivation of the amygdala in those they lead—effectively increasing anxiety and undermining confidence in their leadership. For instance, when she says, “We are looking at all options, and we will make a decision when the time is right,” such statements, while cautious, might feel ambiguous to some, heightening their emotional uncertainty. Her challenge moving forward is to strike the right balance between relational empathy and the decisiveness voters crave in a leader, particularly in times of crisis.

Donald Trump: The Certainty of Command

Donald Trump, by contrast, represents a different form of leadership confidence. His approach is defined by strong, clear, and often declarative statements that project certainty and control. Neuroscience research points to the concept of the certainty bias—the brain's preference for clear, unambiguous information, especially in times of stress. For many voters, Trump’s bold and often defiant statements provide psychological comfort, as they create the perception that he is firmly in control, regardless of external chaos.

Trump is known for using phrases like, "Only I can fix it," and, "We will win so much, you'll get tired of winning." These words exemplify a style of confidence that taps into the brain’s desire for certainty. Neuroscientifically, such strong, definitive language engages the brain’s dopamine system, creating a sense of reward and motivation. His ability to simplify complex issues into digestible soundbites reduces cognitive load, allowing supporters to feel more confident in their decision-making.

Statements like, "We’re going to take back America," and, "I’ve built a great economy before, and I will do it again," also tap into the reward pathways of the brain. Trump’s repetition of success-oriented phrases helps reinforce belief systems and strengthens neural pathways related to certainty and conviction. For many voters, this approach reduces the complexity of challenges and replaces it with a sense of assured control.

However, this same certainty can also create challenges. Neuroscience warns that overconfidence, especially in the face of contradictory evidence, can lead to cognitive dissonance—the psychological discomfort we experience when reality doesn’t align with our beliefs. For some voters, this dissonance creates a tension between the clear, commanding image Trump projects and the real-world consequences of his decisions. His base, however, may be less affected by this, as their brain's reward system has been consistently activated by his strong, confidence-driven messaging.

Confidence and Neuroscience: What’s at Stake in 2024?

As we head into the election, both Kamala Harris and Donald Trump face unique challenges in leveraging the neuroscience of confidence to win over voters. Each candidate taps into different aspects of the brain’s response to uncertainty, which will shape how they are perceived by different segments of the electorate.

1. Trust and Empathy

• Harris: Her leadership is centred around building trust through empathy and collaboration. Statements like, “We rise together,” align with research on the social brain, activating neural circuits that foster trust and social bonding.
• Trump: His leadership fosters trust through bold, unyielding declarations, engaging the certainty bias and providing a sense of stability in a complex world with phrases like, “We will make America great again, and it will be better than ever before.”

2. Emotional Regulation

• Harris: Neuroscience suggests that leaders who can remain calm and composed in the face of uncertainty can co-regulate the emotional states of others. Harris’ calm, reassuring tone with statements like, “We will find a way through this together,” lowers the threat response in the brain.
• Trump: His high-energy, assertive style appeals to the brain’s reward systems, creating a sense of momentum and urgency. His frequent proclamations of certainty, such as “I know what needs to be done, and I will do it,” appeal to those looking for decisive action, even in ambiguous situations.

3. Adapting to Complexity

• Harris: Her leadership promotes thoughtful decision-making, engaging the prefrontal cortex to handle complex, nuanced issues. Her appeal to thoughtful governance is reflected in statements like, “We need to work together and find solutions that work for everyone.”
• Trump: His ability to reduce complexity into simple, decisive messaging resonates with voters who value clarity and certainty, but it risks alienating those who require more nuanced approaches. His declaration, “The world is watching, and we will come out on top,” illustrates his reductionist approach.

Conclusion: The Neuroscience Battle for 2024

In a VUCA world, the ability to project confidence and navigate uncertainty is paramount. Kamala Harris and Donald Trump represent two distinct approaches to the neuroscience of confidence: Harris focuses on emotional connection, empathy, and collective resilience, while Trump taps into the brain’s desire for certainty, control, and quick resolutions.

As the election draws closer, the question voters will ask themselves—consciously or not—is which type of leadership confidence will help them feel secure in an unpredictable world. Both candidates’ leadership styles offer insights into the future direction of the U.S., and neuroscience shows us that their ability to regulate emotions, build trust, and project confidence will be key determinants of their success.

Siobhán Olofsson CPsychol. is a Chartered Psychologist who applies neuroscience to leadership development, helping leaders build confidence and resilience in VUCA environments.