Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Across five experiments (four pre-registered, N = 4,431), we investigate whether emphasizing similarities between Republicans and Democrats can improve intergroup relations between the two groups. Members of both groups who were presented with evidence emphasizing similarities rather than differences in the psychological attitudes of both parties reported greater inclusion of the political opposition in the self, greater belief that common ground can be reached for major social issues, and warmer feelings toward the opposition. Inclusion of the political outgroup in the self mediated the effect of the similarities condition on additional outcomes, relating to more positive and less threatening perceptions of political opposition members. These findings held even when compared with a baseline condition with no information presented to participants. We conclude that by emphasizing the study of group similarities and by disseminating research in a way that highlights similarities, researchers could reduce intergroup hostilities in the political domain.

Keywords

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abramowitz

(2017, March 10–12). Polarization in the United States: Racial resentment, negative partisanship and the rise of Donald Trump [Paper presentation]. Workshop on Polarized Democracies, Central European University, Budapest, Hungary.

Abramowitz

A. I.

Webster

(2016). The rise of negative partisanship and the nationalization of U.S. elections in the 21st century. Electoral Studies, 41, 12–22.

Amodio

D. M.

Jost

J. T.

Master

S. L.

Yee

C. M.

(2007). Neurocognitive correlates of liberalism and conservatism. Nature Neuroscience, 10(10), 1246–1247. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn1979

Aron

E. N.

Smollan

(1992). Inclusion of other in the Self Scale and the structure of interpersonal closeness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(4), 596–612. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.63.4.596

Badea

Jetten

Czukor

Askevis-Leherpeux

(2010). The bases of identification: When optimal distinctiveness needs face social identity threat. British Journal of Social Psychology, 49(1), 21–41. https://doi.org/10.1348/000712608X397665

Bakker

B. N.

Schumacher

Gothreau

Arceneaux

(2020). Conservatives and liberals have similar physiological responses to threats. Nature Human Behavior, 4, 613–621. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-0823-z

Boxell

Gentzkow

Shapiro

J. M

. (2022). Cross-Country Trends in Affective Polarization. The Review of Economics and Statistics. https://doi.org/10.1162/rest_a_01160

Brandt

M. J.

Turner-Zwinkels

F. M.

(2020). No additional evidence that proximity to the July 4th holiday affects affective polarization. Collabra: Psychology, 6(1), 39. https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.368

Byrne

(1961). Interpersonal attraction and attitude similarity. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 62, 713–715. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0044721

10.

Chen

M. K.

Rohla

(2018). The effect of partisanship and political advertising on close family ties. Science, 360, 1020–1024. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaq1433

11.

Clifford

(2020). Compassionate democrats and tough republicans: How ideology shapes partisan stereotypes. Political Behavior, 42, 1269–1293. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-019-09542-z

12.

Cramer

K. J.

(2016). The politics of resentment: Rural consciousness in Wisconsin and the rise of Scott Walker. University of Chicago Press.

13.

Desilver

(2022). The polarization in today’s Congress has roots that go back decades. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/03/10/the-polarization-in-todays-congress-has-roots-that-go-back-decades/

14.

Dhont

Van Hiel

(2011). Direct contact and authoritarianism as moderators between extended contact and reduced prejudice: Lower threat and greater trust as mediators. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 14(2), 223–237. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430210391121

15.

Dimock

Wike

(2021, March 29). America is exceptional in its political divide. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/trust/archive/winter-2021/america-is-exceptional-in-its-political-divide

16.

Fanelli

(2010). “Positive” results increase down the hierarchy of the sciences. PLOS ONE, 5, e10068.

17.

Faul

Erdfelder

Lang

A.-G.

Buchner

(2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146

18.

Fischer

Schwartz

(2011). Whence differences in value priorities? Individual, cultural, or artifactual sources. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 42(7), 1127–1144. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022110381429

19.

Forsythe

Horowitz

J. L.

Savin

N. E.

Sefton

(1994). Fairness in simple bargaining experiments. Games and Economic Behavior, 6(3), 347–369. https://doi.org/10.1006/game.1994.1021

20.

Franco

Malhotra

Simonovits

(2014). Publication bias in the social sciences: Unlocking the file drawer. Science, 345, 1502–1505. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1255484

21.

Gaertner

S. L.

Mann

Murrell

Dovidio

J. F.

(1989). Reducing intergroup bias: The benefits of recategorization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(2), 239–249. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.57.2.239

22.

Galston

W. A.

Kamarck

(2022, January 4). Is democracy failing and putting our economic system at risk? Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/research/is-democracy-failing-and-putting-our-economic-system-at-risk/

23.

Goh

J. X.

Hall

J. A.

Rosenthal

(2016). Mini meta-analysis of your own studies: Some arguments on why and a primer on how. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 10(10), 535–549. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12267

24.

Golec

Federico

C. M.

(2004). Understanding responses to political conflict: Interactive effects of the need for closure and salient conflict schemas. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(6), 750–762. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.87.6.750

25.

Graham

M. H.

Svolik

M. W.

(2020). Democracy in America? Partisanship, polarization, and the robustness of support for democracy in the United States. American Political Science Review, 144, 392–409. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055420000052

26.

Greve

J. E.

Gambino

(2022, July 31). US faces new era of political violence as threats against lawmakers rise. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jul/31/us-political-violence-threats-against-lawmakers

27.

Güth

Schmittberger

Schwarze

(1982). An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 3(4), 367–388. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2681(82)90011-7

28.

Haidt

(2012). The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion. Pantheon Books.

29.

Hanel

P. H. P.

Maio

G. R.

Manstead

A. S. R.

(2019). A new way to look at the data: Similarities between groups of people are large and important. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 116(4), 541–562. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000154

30.

Hanel

P. H. P.

Mehler

D. M.

(2019). Beyond reporting statistical significance: Identifying informative effect sizes to improve scientific communication. Public Understanding of Science, 28(4), 468–485. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662519834193

31.

Hanel

P. H. P.

Wolf

L. J.

(2020). Leavers and remainers after the Brexit referendum: More united than divided after all? British Journal of Social Psychology, 59(2), 470–493. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12359

32.

Hartig

. (2021, January 15). In their own words: How Americans reacted to the rioting at the U.S. Capitol. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/01/15/in-their-own-words-how-americans-reacted-to-the-rioting-at-the-u-s-capitol/

33.

Hartman

Blakey

Womick

Bail

Finkel

E. J.

Han

Sarrouf

Schroeder

Sheeran

Van Bavel

J. J.

Willer

Gray

(2022). Interventions to reduce partisan animosity. Nature Human Behaviour, 6, 1194–1205. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-022-01442-3

34.

Huber

G. A.

Malhotra

(2017). Political homophily in social relationships: Evidence from online dating behavior. The Journal of Politics, 79(1), 269–283. https://doi.org/10.1086/687533

35.

Hyde

J. S.

(2005). The gender similarities hypothesis. American Psychologist, 60(6), 581–592. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.60.6.581

36.

Hyde

J. S.

(2014). Gender similarities and differences. Annual Review of Psychology, 65, 373–398. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115057

37.

Inglehart

Norris

(2016). Trump, Brexit, and the rise of populism: Economic have-nots and cultural backlash (HKS Working Paper No. RWP16-026). https://ssrn.com/abstract=2818659

38.

Inman

H. F.

Bradley

E. L.

(1989). The overlapping coefficient as a measure of agreement between probability distributions and point estimation of the overlap of two normal densities. Communications in Statistics-theory and Methods, 18, 3851–3874.

39.

Iyengar

Lelkes

Levendusky

Malhtora

Westwood

S. J.

(2019). The origins and consequences of affective polarization in the United States. Annual Review of Political Science, 22, 129–146. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051117-073034

40.

Iyengar

Sood

Lelkes

(2012). Affect, not ideology a social identity perspective on polarization. Public Opinion Quarterly, 76, 405–431.

41.

Jost

J. T.

(2017). Ideological asymmetries and the essence of political psychology. Political Psychology, 38(2), 167–208. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12407

42.

Jost

J. T.

Amodio

D. M.

(2012). Political ideology as motivated social cognition: Behavioral and neuroscientific evidence. Motivation and Emotion, 36(1), 55–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-011-9260-7

43.

Jost

J. T.

Federico

C. M.

Napier

J. L.

(2009). Political ideology: Its structure, functions, and elective affinities. Annual Review of Psychology, 60(1), 307–337. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163600

44.

Kaasa

Minkov

(2020). Are the World’s national cultures becoming more similar? Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 51(7–8), 531–550. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022120933677

45.

Kaslow

N. J.

(2015). Translating psychological science to the public. American Psychologist, 70(5), 361–371. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039448

46.

Kenny

(2020). Measuring model fit. https://www.davidakenny.net/cm/fit.htm

47.

Kline

R. B.

(2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Press.

48.

Lauka

McCoy

Firat

R. B.

(2018). Mass partisan polarization: Measuring a relational concept. American Behavioral Scientist, 62(1), 107–126. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764218759581

49.

Lees

Cikara

(2020). Inaccurate group meta-perceptions drive negative out-group attributions in competitive contexts. Nature Human Behaviour, 4, 279–286. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-019-0766-4

50.

Levendusky

M. S.

(2018). Americans, not partisans: Can priming American national identity reduce affective polarization? The Journal of Politics, 80(1), 59–70. https://doi.org/10.1086/693987

51.

Litman

Robinson

Abberbock

(2017). TurkPrime.com: A versatile crowdsourcing data acquisition platform for the behavioral sciences. Behavioral Research Methods, 49, 433–442. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-016-0727-z

52.

Lonsdorf

Dorning

Isackson

Kelly

M. L.

Chang

(2022, June 9). A timeline of how the Jan 6th attack unfolded—Including who said what and when. National Public Radio. https://www.npr.org/2022/01/05/1069977469/a-timeline-of-how-the-jan-6-attackunfolded-including-who-said-what-and-when

53.

Lupu

(2015). Party polarization and mass partisanship: A comparative perspective. Political Behavior, 37, 331–356. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-014-9279-z

54.

McCoy

Rahman

Somer

(2018). Polarization and the global crisis of democracy: Common patterns, dynamics, and pernicious consequences for democratic polities. American Behavioral Scientist, 62(1), 16–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764218759576

55.

McLamore

Syropoulos

Leidner

Hirschberger

Young

Zein

R. A.

Baumert

Bilewicz

van Bezouw

Chatard

Chekroun

Choi

H.-S.

Euh

Gomez

Kardos

Khoo

Y. H.

Loughnan

(2022). How (dis)trust in scientific information links political ideology and reactions towards the Coronavirus pandemic: Evaluating associations in the U.S. and globally. Scientific Reports, 12, 3724. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-07508-6

56.

Montoya

R. M.

Horton

R. S.

Kirchner

(2008). Is actual similarity necessary for attraction? A meta-analysis of actual and perceived similarity. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 25, 889–922. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407508096700

57.

Mooney

(2012, April). Politics may be partly genetic, now what? CNN. https://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/02/11/politics.genes/index.html

58.

Mussweiler

(2003). Comparison processes in social judgment: Mechanisms and consequences. Psychological Review, 110, 472–489. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.472

59.

Open Science Collaboration. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349, aac4716. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac4716

60.

Oxley

D. R.

Smith

K. B.

Alford

R. J.

Hibbing

V. M.

Miller

J. L.

(2008). Political attitudes vary with physiological traits. Science, 321, 1667–1670. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1157627

61.

Paulhus

D. L.

(1988). Assessing self-deception and impression management in self-report: The balanced inventory of desirable responding. Department of Psychology, University of British Colombia.

62.

Riek

B. M.

Mania

E. W.

Gaertner

S. L.

McDonald

S. A.

Lamoreaux

M. J.

(2010). Does a common ingroup identity reduce intergroup threat? Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 13(4), 403–423. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430209346701

63.

Ruggeri

Većkalov

Bojanić

Andersen

T. L.

Ashcroft-Jones

Ayacaxli

Barea-Arroyo

Berge

M. L.

Bjørndal

L. D.

Bursalıoğlu

Bühler

Čadek

Çetinçelik

Clay

Cortijos-Bernabeu

Damnjanović

Dugue

T. M.

Esberg

Esteban-Serna

. . . Folke

(2021). The general fault in our fault lines. Nature Human Behaviour, 5, 1369–1380. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01092-x

64.

Schalet

A. T.

Tropp

L. R.

Troy

L. M.

(2020). Making research usable beyond academic circles: A relational model of public engagement. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 20(1), 336–356. https://doi.org/10.1111/asap.12204

65.

Schwartz

S. H.

(1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In Zanna

M. P.

(Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 1–65). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60281-6

66.

Schwartz

S. H.

Bardi

(2001). Value hierarchies across cultures: Taking a similarities perspective. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32(3), 268–290. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022101032003002

67.

Sparkman

Walton

G. M.

(2017). Dynamic Norms Promote Sustainable Behavior, Even if It Is Counternormative. Psychological Science, 28(11), 1663–1674. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617719950

68.

Suls

Wheeler

(2000). A selective history of classic and neo-social comparison theory. In Suls

Wheeler

(Eds.), Handbook of social comparison: Theory and research (pp. 3–19). Kluwer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-4237-7_1

69.

Tajfel

(1970). Experiments in intergroup discrimination. Scientific American, 223, 96–102.

70.

Tajfel

Turner

J. C.

(1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In Austin

W. G.

Worchel

(Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Brooks/Cole.

71.

Vedantam

Boyle

Vargas-Restrepo

(2018, October 8). Nature, nurture and your politics. National Public Radio. https://www.npr.org/2018/10/03/654127241/naturenurture-and-your-politics

72.

Voelkel

J. G.

Stagnaro

Chu

Pink

S. L.

Mernyk

J. S.

Redekopp

… Willer

(2023, March 20). Megastudy identifying effective interventions to strengthen Americans’ democratic attitudes. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/y79u5

73.

Willis

Daniels

Disler

Khalil

Zhou

A. (Ye)

. (2017). Reliability and validity of the intergroup compromise inventory in two bipartisan samples. SAGE Open, 7(4), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244017739339

74.

Worthen

(2018, December 15). Is there such a thing as an authoritarian voter? The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/15/opinion/sunday/trump-authoritarian-voters-political-science.htm

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.19 MB

Emphasizing Similarities Between Politically Opposed Groups and Their Influence in Perceptions of the Political Opposition: Evidence From Five Experiments

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material