Recent scholarship has documented changing norms toward political tolerance and an increase in intolerant beliefs in the United States. Descriptive norm theory attributes attitudinal and behavioral changes to beliefs about how we perceive other people think and act. Applied to political tolerance, increasing the perception that society is more or less tolerant should result in corresponding changes among individuals. Neglected from this discussion, however, is the distinction between norms that are applied universally and norms that are applied to specific targets. Four studies show mixed support for descriptive norm theory with norms altering individual tolerance judgments mostly when applied universally. Norms aimed at a particularistic group fail to change tolerance judgments suggesting an important limitation to norm influence. Contrary to expectations, we uncover a reversal effect among Democrats whereby exposure to universalistic norms of intolerance leads to higher levels of tolerance.
AlbertsonB.JesseeS. (2022). Moderator placement in survey experiments: Racial resentment and the “welfare” versus “assistance to the poor” question wording experiment. Journal of Experimental Political Science, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1017/xps.2022.18
2.
ArmstrongG. M.WronskiJ. (2019). Framing hate: Moral foundations, party cues, and (in)tolerance of offensive speech. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 7(2), 695–725. https://doi.org/10.5964/jspp.v7i2.1006
3.
AxelrodR. (1986). An evolutionary approach to norms. American Political Science Review, 80(4), 1095–1111. https://doi.org/10.2307/1960858
4.
BlantonH.ChristieC. (2003). Deviance regulation: A theory of action and identity. Review of General Psychology, 7(2), 115–149. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.7.2.115
5.
BochA. (2021). Freedom of speech in a partisan age: Political tolerance, hate speech, and public opinion. Dissertation. Stanford University.
CialdiniR. B.RenoR. R.KallgrenC. A. (1990). A focus theory on normative conduct: Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(6), 1015–1026. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.58.6.1015
CrandallC. S.MillerJ. M.WhiteM. H. (2018). Changing norms following the 2016 US presidential election: The Trump effect on prejudice. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 9(2), 186–192. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617750735
10.
DavisD. W.SilverB. D. (2004). Civil liberties vs. security: Public opinion in the context of the terrorist attacks on America. American Journal of Political Science, 48(1), 28–46. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0092-5853.2004.00054.x
11.
DavisJ. A. (1975). Communism, conformity, cohorts, and categories: American tolerance in 1954 and 1972-73. American Journal of Sociology, 81(3), 491–513. https://doi.org/10.1086/226105
12.
EkinsE. (2017). The state of free speech and tolerance in America. Cato Institute.
GerberA. S.GreenD. P.LarimerC. W. (2008). Social pressure and voter turnout: Evidence from a large-scale field experiment. American Political Science Review, 102(1), 33–48. https://doi.org/10.1017/s000305540808009x
15.
GerberA. S.RogersT. (2009). Descriptive social norms and motivation to vote: Everybody’s voting and so should you. The Journal of Politics, 71(1), 178–191. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022381608090117
16.
GibsonJ.ClaassenC.BarcelóJ. (2020). Deplorables: Emotions, political sophistication, and political intolerance. American Politics Research, 48(2), 252–262. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X18820864
17.
GibsonJ. L. (1989). Understandings of justice: Institutional legitimacy, procedural justice, and political tolerance. Law & Society Review, 23(3), 469–496. https://doi.org/10.2307/3053830
18.
GibsonJ. L. (1998). A sober second thought: An experiment in persuading Russians to tolerate. American Journal of Political Science, 42(3), 819–850. https://doi.org/10.2307/2991731
19.
GibsonJ. L. (2006). Enigmas of intolerance: Fifty years after Stouffer's communism, conformity, and civil liberties. Perspectives on Politics, 4(1), 21–34. https://doi.org/10.1017/s153759270606004x
20.
GibsonJ. L. (2013). Measuring political tolerance and general support for pro-civil liberties policies: Notes, evidence, and cautions. Public Opinion Quarterly, 77(S1), 45–68. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfs073
21.
GibsonJ. L.GouwsA. (2001). Making tolerance judgments: The effects of context, local and national. Journal of Politics, 63(4), 1067–1090. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-3816.00101
22.
GibsonJ. L.GouwsA. (2005). Overcoming intolerance in South Africa: Experiments in democratic persuasion. Cambridge University Press.
23.
GoldsteinN. J.CialdiniR. B.GriskeviciusV. (2008). A room with a viewpoint: Using social norms to motivate environmental conservation in hotels. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(3), 472–482. https://doi.org/10.1086/586910
24.
HallsworthM.ChadbornT.SallisA.SandersM.BerryD.GreavesF.ClementsL.DaviesS. C. (2016). Provision of social norm feedback to high prescribers of antibiotics in general practice: A pragmatic national randomised controlled trial. The Lancet, 387(10029), 1743–1752. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)00215-4
25.
JacksonJ. M. (2019). Black Americans and the “crime narrative”: Comments on the use of news frames and their impacts on public opinion formation. Politics, Groups, and Identities, 7(1), 231–241. https://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2018.1553198
26.
KeaneL. D.NickersonD. W. (2015). When reports depress rather than inspire: A field experiment using age cohorts as reference groups. Journal of Political Marketing, 14(4), 381–390. https://doi.org/10.1080/15377857.2015.1086129
27.
MasonL. (2018). Uncivil agreement: How politics became our identity. University of Chicago Press.
28.
McCloskyH. (1964). Consensus and ideology in American politics. American Political Science Review, 58(2), 361–382. https://doi.org/10.2307/1952868
29.
MurrayG. R.MatlandR. E. (2014). Mobilization effects using mail: Social pressure, descriptive norms, and timing. Political Research Quarterly, 67(2), 304–319. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912913499234
30.
NewmanB.MerollaJ. L.ShahS.LemiD. C.CollingwoodL.RamakrishnanS. K. (2020). The Trump effect: An experimental investigation of the emboldening effect of racially inflammatory elite communication. British Journal of Political Science, 51(3), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0007123419000590
31.
NunnC. Z.CrockettH. J.Allen WilliamsJ.Jr. (1978). Tolerance for nonconformity. Jossey-Bass Publishers.
32.
OyamotC. M.FisherE. L.DeasonG.BorgidaE.BorgidaE. (2012). Attitudes toward immigrants: The interactive role of the authoritarian predisposition, social norms, and humanitarian values. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(1), 97–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.08.003
33.
PanagopoulosC.LarimerC. W.CondonM. (2014). Social pressure, descriptive norms and voter mobilization. Political Behavior, 36(2), 451–469. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-013-9234-4
34.
PasekJ. (2016). When will nonprobability surveys mirror probability surveys? Considering types of inference and weighting strategies as criteria for correspondence. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 28(2), 269–291. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edv016
35.
PerkinsH. W.BerkowitzA. D. (1986). Perceiving the community norms of alcohol use among students: Some research implications for campus alcohol education programming. International Journal of the Addictions, 21(9-10), 961–976. https://doi.org/10.3109/10826088609077249
36.
PetersenM.SlothuusR.StubagerR.TogebyL. (2011). Freedom for all? The strength and limits of political tolerance. British Journal of Political Science, 41(3), 581–597. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123410000451
37.
ProthroJ. W.GriggC. M. (1960). Fundamental principles of democracy: Bases of agreement and disagreement. The Journal of Politics, 22(2), 26–294. https://doi.org/10.2307/2127359
38.
SchaffnerB. F. (2020). The acceptance and expression of prejudice during the Trump era. Cambridge University Press.
39.
SnidermanP. M.CarminesE. G. (1997). Reaching beyond race. Harvard University Press.
40.
SnidermanP. M.CarminesE. G.LaymanG. C.CarterM. (1996). Beyond race: Social justice as a race neutral ideal. American Journal of Political Science, 40(1), 33–55. https://doi.org/10.2307/2111693
41.
StoufferS. A. (1955). Communism, conformity, and civil liberties: A cross-section of the nation speaks its mind. Transaction Publishers.
42.
SullivanJ. L.PieresonJ.MarcusG. E. (1979). An alternative conceptualization of political tolerance: Illusory increases 1950s–1970s. American Political Science Review, 73(3), 781–794. https://doi.org/10.2307/1955404
43.
SullivanJ. L.PieresonJ.MarcusG. E. (1993). Political Tolerance and American democracy. University of Chicago Press.
44.
SullivanJ. L.TransueJ. E. (1999). The psychological underpinnings of democracy: A selective review of research on political tolerance, interpersonal trust, and social capital. Annual Review of Psychology, 50(1), 625–650. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.625
45.
TankardM. E.PaluckE. L. (2016). Norm perception as a vehicle for social change. Social Issues and Policy Review, 10(1), 181–211. https://doi.org/10.1111/sipr.12022
46.
ValentinoN. A.NeunerF. G.VandenbroekL. M. (2018). The changing norms of racial political rhetoric and the end of racial priming. The Journal of Politics, 80(3), 757–771. https://doi.org/10.1086/694845
47.
WilsonW. J. (2012). The truly disadvantaged: The inner city, the underclass, and public policy. University of Chicago Press.
48.
YeagerD. S.KrosnickJ.ChangL.JavitzH. S.LevinduskyM. S. (2011). Comparing the accuracy of RDD telephone surveys and internet surveys conducted with probability and non-probability samples. Public Opinion Quarterly75(4), nfr020–nfr747. https://doi.org/10.2307/41288414
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.
