Most employees aren’t debating political polls in meetings or discussing contentious issues around the coffee maker. But politics can still make its way into the workplace. A study from Texas A&M University suggests that political information employees consume during their personal time can influence how they feel and behave on the job.

Published in Computers in Human Behavior, the study was led by Dr. Ian Hughes, assistant professor of psychological and brain sciences at Texas A&M. Researchers followed 308 full-time U.S. workers over nine consecutive weeks during the 2024 presidential primary season to examine whether political information consumed outside work could spill over into employees’ working lives.

Each week, participants reported their exposure to political content from news, social media, podcasts and other sources, as well as their levels of anxiety, hope, work engagement and willingness to help colleagues. Rather than deciding whether the political information was objectively positive or negative, researchers asked participants how they personally perceived the content they encountered.

The results showed a consistent pattern. During weeks when employees consumed more negatively perceived political information than was typical for them, they reported greater anxiety. That anxiety was, in turn, associated with lower work engagement, including reduced energy, enthusiasm and investment in their jobs. Hughes noted that emotional reactions to political information may continue even after someone closes an app, turns off the television or heads to work.

The effects, however, were not entirely negative. When employees encountered more political information they personally viewed positively, they reported greater feelings of hope. Higher levels of hope were associated with stronger workplace engagement and a greater willingness to help co-workers. The findings suggest that the workplace effects of political information may depend partly on the emotions that the information generates.

Rather than suggesting that politics itself is inherently harmful, the researchers identified anxiety and hope as important pathways connecting political information with workplace behaviour. This distinction adds nuance to discussions about political media, which often focus primarily on stress, conflict and polarisation. Employees may arrive at work carrying emotional responses to events and information encountered elsewhere, even when politics is never discussed on the job.

The researchers are not recommending that people stop following political news or that employers try to control what employees consume. Instead, they suggest recognising political information as one of many potential sources of emotional strain. Strategies such as taking breaks from media, getting sufficient sleep, exercising, practising mindfulness or gratitude, and making time for leisure and recovery may help people replenish emotional resources. Workplace mental health and stress-management supports may also be useful.

The broader message is that the boundaries between political life and working life may be more porous than they appear. Staying informed remains important, Hughes said, but political information can have emotional consequences that extend beyond the moment in which it is consumed. Even when employees never talk about politics with their colleagues, the anxiety or hope generated by what they see and hear outside work may still shape how they experience their workday.

More information: Ian Hughes et al, The work-related consequences of employees’ media-based political information consumption: A nine-wave weekly study during the 2024 U.S. presidential primary season, Computers in Human Behavior. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2026.109118

Journal information: Computers in Human Behavior Provided by Texas A&M University