Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Reducing Affective Polarization: Warm Group Relations or Policy Compromise?

  • Hebrew University of Jerusalem

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

107 Scopus citations

Abstract

Hostility between rival political partisans, referred to as affective polarization, has increased in the United States over the last several decades generating considerable interest in its reduction. The current study examines two distinct sets of factors that potentially reduce affective polarization, drawn respectively from a group-based and a policy-based model of its origins. Specifically, we contrast the degree to which warm social relations and policy compromise reduce affective polarization. In two experimental studies (N = 937), respondents read a mock news story about an observed interaction between Chuck Schumer, Senate minority leader, and Mitch McConnell, Senate majority leader. The leaders either interact in a warm or hostile manner and independently compromise, or fail to compromise, on immigration matters. In both studies, warm leader relations reduced affective polarization whereas policy compromise did not. We consider the implications of these findings for the study of affective polarization and its reduction.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)291-309
Number of pages19
JournalPolitical Psychology
Volume42
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 2021

Keywords

  • affective polarization
  • experiment
  • issue compromise
  • leader relations
  • partisanship

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Reducing Affective Polarization: Warm Group Relations or Policy Compromise?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this