Abstract
American politics is becoming increasingly polarized, which biases decision-making and reduces open-minded debate. In two experiments, we demonstrate that despite this polarization, a simple manipulation can make people express and endorse less polarized views about competing political candidates. In Study 1, we approached 136 participants at the first 2016 presidential debate and on the streets of New York City. Participants completed a survey evaluating Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump on various personality traits; 72% gave responses favoring a single candidate. We then covertly manipulated their surveys so that the majority of their responses became moderate instead. Participants only noticed and corrected a few of these manipulations. When asked to explain their responses, 94% accepted the manipulated responses as their own and rationalized this neutral position accordingly, even though they reported more polarized views moments earlier. In Study 2, we replicated the experiment online with a more politically diverse sample of 498 participants. Both Clinton and Trump supporters showed nearly identical rates of acceptance and rationalization of their manipulated-to-neutral positions. These studies demonstrate how false feedback can powerfully shape the expression of political views. More generally, our findings reveal the potential for open-minded discussion even in a fundamentally divided political climate.
Highlights
The political landscape in the United States is becoming increasingly polarized [1,2,3,4]
I . . . feel like they both are really experienced.”. Another participant originally rated diplomatic as 73% on the Clinton side, which we changed to more neutral (57%)
The researchers found that people across the political spectrum were more similar than they were different on several moral and political attitudes
Summary
The political landscape in the United States is becoming increasingly polarized [1,2,3,4]. Studies have shown that this polarization biases political decisions as well as reduces informative and critical thinking. People tend to automatically support policy issues proposed by their own party and reject those coming from the opposition [5]. People usually side with their own party’s stance on various issues [6]. Polarization strongly correlates with confirmation bias: polarized individuals are more inclined to seek and interpret information to confirm their present ideas about the world [7].
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.