Doctoral Dissertation Research: When Does Interparty Conversation Harm or Heal Affective Polarization

Washington University, Saint Louis MO

Investigators

Abstract

Americans increasingly dislike, distrust, and even discriminate against members of the opposite political party. Yet, Americans interact with opposing party members in their everyday lives. Conversations—whether touching on politics or not—occur at work, online, or when ordering a morning coffee. How do these everyday conversations across party lines affect the animosity Americans hold for opposing party members? When might everyday conversations reinforce, and when might they mitigate, this animosity? Because engaging in disagreeable political conversation is important for the healthy functioning of a democracy, this research analyzes the role political conversations play in shaping attitudes toward opposing party members. By identifying the conditions under which conversations tend to heal, and when might they worsen, America's partisan animosity, this research brings evidence to bear on how Americans' everyday interactions impact the broader political climate. Americans' increasing animosity for members of the opposing party is well-documented. However, it remains unclear how everyday interactions amongst opposing party members affect this trend. On the one hand, many Americans strongly identify as members of a political party. Research shows that partisanship, as a group-based identity, negatively colors our perceptions of outparty members. It follows that interparty conversation could go awry and further harm negative attitudes toward outparty members. One the other hand, theories of intergroup relations suggest that contact with outparty members can heal outparty animosity. This project addresses these conflicting expectations by theorizing about how interparty conversations unfold, what effect interparty conversations have on outparty attitudes, and how this may differ for political and non-political conversations. This project also develops two novel methodological approaches to facilitate an experimental test of its hypotheses. First, this project develops an experimental design suited for experiments involving social interaction, which is common in studies of deliberation and political discussion. Second, this project develops a chat software so participants can engage in real-time, written, online conversations, without the need for an academic laboratory or existing participant pool. Taken together, the experimental design and chat software overcome a set of methodological and practical concerns to improve the experimental study of social interaction. This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.