By Paul Gallagher

Gordon Brown and David Cameron take note.

Humans are highly emotional creatures when it comes to voting, according to the latest scientific research. Two emotions -- fear and anger -- play a vital role in determining how receptive voters are to politicians on the campaign trail.

If you’re a British politician eager to secure a seat at Westminster on May 6th, you may wish to gauge the emotional temperature of voters on the doorstep and adapt your approach accordingly in the coming weeks.

A growing body of research into the power of emotions in politics reveals that fearful voters are more likely to base their decisions on a detailed evaluation of issues, while angry voters are more readily swayed by vague criteria, such as party loyalty, Newsweek reports in “Fear and Loathing in the Voting Booth” (http://www.newsweek.com/id/235964/).

Angry voters rely on vague and general information, according to the journal Psychological Science. Fearful voters are more likely to make an effort to get to grips with a candidate’s position on issues.

So, what does that mean for British Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s ruling Labour Party and his potential nemesis in the guise of Conservative leader David Cameron, or even Liberal Democrats leader Nick Clegg?

“Anger would tend to give incumbents an advantage when people have a generally positive feeling about them. But if voters’ general feeling is negative.... then the incumbent is in trouble, with the result that inciting fear and simultaneously soothing anger might be the best strategy for an incumbent,” according to researcher Linda Isbell.