How perceived polarization predicts attitude moralization (and vice versa): A four-wave longitudinal study during the 2020 U.S. election.

Within structurally polarized and dynamic contexts, such as the U.S. 2020 presidential elections, the moralization of individuals' attitudes on a specific topic (e.g., climate policy) can dangerously escalate disagreements between groups into zero-sum conflict. However, limited knowledge exists regarding the factors that influence individuals' tendency to moralize their attitudes over time, and what the role of structural polarization is in this psychological process. Our objective is to test a theoretically integrative model of when and how perceived polarization is related to attitude moralization over time within the polarized context of the U.S. 2020 presidential elections and explore reciprocal feedback loops to understand the dynamic relationship between polarization and moralization over time. Our model predicts that, when repeatedly faced with outgroup expressions in the news, individuals' perceptions of polarization will predict within-person attitude moralization over time via strengthening their value-protective responses to these expressions (i.e., perceiving dyadic harm and experiencing negative moral emotions toward the outgroup). To test our model, we conducted a four-wave, 4-month longitudinal study among Biden supporters (N = 1,236) and Trump supporters (N = 617). The results of the within-person analyses generally supported the model's hypotheses across both samples and various attitude topics. Furthermore, cross-lagged structural equation models explored reciprocal influences, revealing positive feedback loops between structural polarization and attitude moralization over time. Our findings thus indicate that perceived polarization strengthens attitude moralization (and vice versa) over time-a dynamic process that helps to explain how nonmoralized conflict between groups can evolve into zero-sum conflict during periods of intense polarization. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

The sound of silence: The importance of bystander support for confronters in the prevention of norm erosion.

Observing deviant behaviour can lead to 'norm erosion', where a norm is no longer seen as relevant and compliance with it is reduced. Previous research argues that social confrontations can mitigate norm erosion. However, this work has not considered the impact of bystanders to confrontations, who might influence the outcome by supporting-or failing to support-the person confronting a social rule breaker. We examine the effect of bystanders' reactions on preventing norm erosion across three experimental studies. We examined how supportive and non-supportive bystander reactions to a confronter impacted the perceived strength of a prosocial norm among participants and their behavioural intentions. We find that when bystanders explicitly supported the confronter against the rule breaker, the norm was perceived as stronger-and sometimes, compliance intentions were higher-than when bystanders did not respond to the confronter. A mini meta-analysis across the three studies reveals that the effect of bystander support on perceived norm strength is large and robust. Our work demonstrates that for the prevention of norm erosion, confrontations benefit greatly from being explicitly supported by bystanders.

Feeling heard: Operationalizing a key concept for social relations.

Feeling heard is considered a cornerstone of close relationships and crucial to healthy self-development, but psychologically, this sentiment of feeling heard remains understudied. The current paper therefore aims to define and measure the experience of feeling heard. Based on an integrative literature review, feeling heard is conceptualized as consisting of five components at two conceptual levels. At the interpersonal level people feel heard when they have 1) voice, and receive 2) attention, 3) empathy, 4) respect. At the collective level people should experience 5) common ground. In two population surveys (N = 194, N = 1000), we find that feeling heard is a unitary concept, and we develop and validate the feeling heard scale (FHS); a concise eight-item scale with good psychometric properties. Results show that the FHS is a distinct predictor of conversation intentions in many different contexts and relationships. In fact, the FHS is the strongest predictor of intentions for conflict behavior among a set of 15 related variables (e.g., acquaintance, intimacy). We conclude by reflecting on the potential applications of this scale: in interpersonal relations and professional contacts, the FHS enables the assessment of one crucial dimension of social interaction.

Attempts to encourage diplomacy in online interactions: Three informative failures.

Online discussions about controversial topics seem more prone to misunderstanding and even polarization than similar discussions held face-to-face. Recent research uncovered an important reason why: certain behaviors that are used to communicate diplomacy and tact in face-to-face discussions - specifically, responsiveness and ambiguity - are more difficult to enact online. To improve online interaction experiences and understand the underlying mechanisms better, we ran three exploratory studies in which we tried to manipulate these diplomatic behaviors in online and face-to-face conversations. Study 1 and 2 aimed to increase ambiguity and responsiveness in online environments to test whether it would result in increased experiences of solidarity. To this end, Study 1 (N = 68, repeated measures) compared a regular chat function with a chat function in which interaction partners saw each other's typing in real time. In Study 2 (N = 74, repeated measures), we introduced a keyboard that allowed participants to make interjecting sounds alongside text-based communication. In contrast, Study 3 (N = 105, repeated measures) aimed to reduce responsiveness and ambiguity in face-to-face discussion to test whether this would hamper participants' ability to navigate disagreements while maintaining solidarity. We asked participants about their conversational experiences both quantitatively and qualitatively in all studies. We did not find the expected effects in any of the studies. The qualitative analyses of participants' behavior and commentary gave some insights into the reasons. Participants compensated for and/or distanced themselves from the manipulations. These behavioral adaptations all seemed to be socially motivated. We conclude by offering recommendations for research into online polarization.

An event-contingent method to track disfluency effects on the relationship and the self.

BACKGROUND: Theoretically, reductions of self-esteem among people who stutter (PWS) are often explained by individual negative cognitions or emotions of the PWS or their conversation partners. We propose that the flow of a conversation can be seen as a representation of the relationship between speakers, and that by disrupting this flow, a stutter may directly threaten this relationship, and in turn affect self-esteem. Methodologically, we present a new, event-contingent, method that assesses fluctuations in self-esteem over time and thereby allows one to assess the predictive value of specific conversational experiences. AIMS: To have both a theoretical and a methodological contribution on conversational disfluency. METHODS & PROCEDURES: Our focus is not on stable individual factors, but we expect that fluctuations within the flow of everyday conversations predict changes in self-esteem. We studied these fluctuations with an experience sampling method which prompted participants to answer a brief survey after each of 10 conversations in a 2-week period. Self-identified PWS (n = 58) and people who do not stutter (PWNS; n = 53) reported on their individual negative cognitions and emotions and experienced relational quality and state self-esteem in more than 1000 conversations. By assessing fluctuations in self-esteem over time, this method allows one to assess the predictive value of specific conversational experiences. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Correlational evidence demonstrates that flow disruptions are associated with temporary reductions in self-esteem. This association is mediated by increased individual negative cognitions and emotions, as well as threatened social relationships. This appeared to be true for both PWS and PWNS, although PWS experienced on average less conversational flow and lower state self-esteem. On average, PWS did not experience lower relational quality than PWNS. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: An event-contingent recording method is a useful way to assess momentary fluctuations in self-esteem. Findings are consistent with the notion that people monitor their relationship by attending to fluctuations in conversational flow; whereas a smooth conversational flow indicates a strong relationship, disruptions of flow (e.g., as caused by a stutter or other factors) signal a threat to the relationship. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject Even though adverse effects of stuttering on the experience of self-esteem have been reported, the evidence for this relation is equivocal. Because the evidence is mixed, it becomes interesting to examine the processes that provide insight in how stuttering may affect self-esteem. Theoretically, reductions of self-esteem among PWS are often explained by individual negative cognitions or emotions of the PWS or their conversation partners. Methodologically, studies examine this relation by single self-report measures, or by laboratory studies. What this paper adds to existing knowledge Our theoretical model shows that the flow of a conversation can be seen as a representation of the relationship between speakers, and that by disrupting this flow, a stutter directly threatens this relationship, and in turn, affects self-esteem. Methodologically, we present a new, event-contingent, method that assesses fluctuations in self-esteem over time and thereby allows one to assess the predictive value of specific conversational experiences. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Going beyond the study of stable individual cognitions and emotions of PWS and listeners, our findings show that a close examination of between-conversation fluctuations in flow can teach us about the day-to-day reality of people living with speech disorders, and the way they develop relationships and self-esteem.

A compliment's cost: How positive responses to non-traditional choices may paradoxically reinforce traditional gender norms.

In times of societal change, like changes in gender roles, one may compliment men deciding to spend more time on childcare, or women pursuing a job higher up, to support their pioneering behaviour. However, we predict that while compliments may communicate appreciation of someone's behaviour, they simultaneously communicate that a norm has been breached, and thus that the behaviour is not considered 'normal'. In four studies (total N = 821), we show that men receive more compliments for reducing work hours for childcare than women (Study 1). Moreover, compliments (compared to neutral responses) signal more descriptive norm deviance, and this has downstream consequences for perceptions of the target's gender belonging and decision doubt and for perceived societal norms (Studies 2-4). Together, these findings contribute to our understanding of normative communication patterns as well as potential paradoxical reinforcement of gender norms through compliments.

Attitude Moralization Within Polarized Contexts: An Emotional Value-Protective Response to Dyadic Harm Cues.

Polarization about societal issues involves attitudinal conflict, but we know little about how such conflict transforms into moral conflict. Integrating insights on polarization and psychological value protection, we propose a model that predicts when and how attitude moralization (i.e., when attitudes become grounded in core values) may be triggered and develops within polarized contexts. We tested this model in three experiments (total N = 823) in the context of the polarized Zwarte Piet (blackface) debate in the Netherlands. Specifically, we tested the hypotheses that (a) situational cues to dyadic harm in this context (i.e., an outgroup that is perceived as intentionally inflicting harm onto innocent victims) trigger individuals to moralize their relevant attitude, because of (b) emotional value-protective responses. Findings supported both hypotheses across different regional contexts, suggesting that attitude moralization can emerge within polarized contexts when people are exposed to actions by attitudinal opponents perceived as causing dyadic harm.

A Polarized Discourse: Effects of Opinion Differentiation and Structural Differentiation on Communication.

In Western societies, many polarized debates extend beyond the area of opinions, having consequences for social structures within society. Such segmentation of society into opinion-based groups may hinder communication, making it difficult to reconcile viewpoints across group boundaries. In three representative samples from Australia and the Netherlands (N = 1,206), we examine whether perceived polarization predicts the quality (harmony, comfort, and experience of negative emotions) and quantity (avoidance of the issue) of communication with others in the community. We distinguish between perceived opinion differentiation (i.e., the extent to which opinions in society are divided) and perceived structural differentiation (i.e., the extent to which society fissions into subgroups). Results show that although opinion differentiation positively predicts the discussion of societal issues, the belief that these opinions reflect a deeper societal divide predicts negative communication expectations and intentions. We discuss how polarization perceptions may reinforce communicative behaviors that catalyze actual polarization processes.

A New Opinion Polarization Index Developed by Integrating Expert Judgments.

Opinion polarization is increasingly becoming an issue in today's society, producing both unrest at the societal level, and conflict within small scale communications between people of opposite opinion. Often, opinion polarization is conceptualized as the direct opposite of agreement and consequently operationalized as an index of dispersion. However, in doing so, researchers fail to account for the bimodality that is characteristic of a polarized opinion distribution. A valid measurement of opinion polarization would enable us to predict when, and on what issues conflict may arise. The current study is aimed at developing and validating a new index of opinion polarization. The weights of this index were derived from utilizing the knowledge of 58 international experts on polarization through an expert survey. The resulting Opinion Polarization Index predicted expert polarization scores in opinion distributions better than common measures of polarization, such as the standard deviation, Van der Eijk's polarization measure and Esteban and Ray's polarization index. We reflect on the use of expert ratings for the development of measurements in this case, and more in general.

Private-Public Opinion Discrepancy.

In many Western societies there are rising concerns about increasing polarization in public debate. However, statistics on private attitudes paint a different picture: the average attitudes in societies are more moderate and remain rather stable over time. The present paper presents an agent-based model of how such discrepancies between public opinion and private attitudes develop at the scale of micro-societies. Based on social psychological theorizing, the model distinguishes between two types of agents: a) those seeking to gain or maintain a good reputation and status, and b) those seeking to promote group harmony by reaching consensus. We characterized these different types of agents by different decision rules for either voicing their opinion or remaining silent, based on the behavior of their proximal network. Results of the model simulations show that even when the private attitudes of the agents are held constant, publicly expressed opinions can oscillate and (depending on the reputational concerns of individual actors) situations can occur in which minorities as well as majorities are silenced. We conclude that the macro-level consequences of micro-level decisions to either voice an opinion or remain silent provide a foundation for better understanding how public opinions are shaped. Moreover, we discuss the conditions under which public opinion could be considered a good representation of private attitudes in a society.

The impact of art: Exploring the social-psychological pathways that connect audiences to live performances.

Group growth is of fundamental importance to understanding social influence. How do passive bystanders become psychologically involved when observing a small group of actors? Our hypothesis was that the kind of solidarity displayed by the group shapes the bonds that emerge with an audience. We studied audience responses to modern dance performances and conducted 2 field experiments and 1 lab experiment (N = 263, 363, and 147). Performances were developed jointly with choreographers: Dancers acted as an aggregate of individuals or displayed mechanical or organic solidarity. As predicted, the emergent bond between audience members and dancers was influenced by the kind of solidarity on display. When dancers displayed mechanical solidarity, the emergence of bonds was mainly predicted by perceived unity. When organic solidarity was displayed, the individual value of each dancer played a key role. Interestingly, overall artistic evaluation was affected in parallel with the development of bonds: the kind of solidarity displayed influenced performance evaluation. Finally, Experiment 2b showed that solidarity displayed on stage influenced the postperformance cooperative behavior among audience members. The article discusses the social psychological pathways by which performing arts influence communities and society. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

The polarizing effects of group discussion in a negative normative context: Integrating societal-, group-, and individual-level factors.

In this research, we investigate how a negative (or hostile) norm regarding minorities at the societal level can fuel polarization between majority subgroups at the local level. We hypothesize that rapid social change in the form of polarization results from the interplay between small group processes and perceptions of society at large. By employing a novel analytic approach that uses variances to capture non-linear societal change, we were able to study polarization processes. In three studies among high school and university students (N = 347), we manipulated the majority norm about a minority category (positive vs. negative). Subsequently, participants read about a minority member's ambiguous behaviour and evaluated this target. All studies used a similar paradigm, but they varied in whether or not participants discussed the ambiguous behaviour within local groups. Results showed that the majority norm at the societal level affected perceptions of the minority member's behaviour when people discussed this behaviour in a local majority group but not when they reflected on it individually. Specifically, group discussions led to polarization between local groups within a broader social category, but only in the context of a negative majority norm. This effect was predicted by the a priori perception of the local group norm. Results are discussed in terms of the integration of society- and group-level processes when studying the development of intergroup attitudes and practical implications for the coarsening climate of the societal debate about current societal issues.

Regulating shared reality with micro-dynamics in the form of conversation.

One of the central goals within communication is to establish whether people are on the same wavelength. Although such assessment can occur objectively, by exchanging and comparing viewpoints, people may also derive a sense of shared reality subjectively, through micro-dynamics in the form of conversation that inform them whether their views are shared. The present review outlines the role of these micro-dynamics in developing and regulating a shared reality. It focuses on three different contexts: intergroup communication, computer mediated communication and communication within intimate relationships. The review concludes with a discussion of the power of micro-dynamics in comparison to more explicit forms of social validation.

Beyond Content of Conversation.

Social interaction is pivotal to the formation of social relationships and groups. Much is known about the importance of interaction content (e.g., the transfer of information). The present review concentrates on the influence of the act of conversing on the emergence of a sense of solidarity, more or less independently of the content. Micro-characteristics of the conversation (e.g., brief silences, smooth turn-taking) can profoundly influence the emergence and the regulation of relationships and of solidarity. We suggest that this might be because the form of a conversation is experienced as an expression of the social structures within the group. Because of its dynamic nature, moreover, the form of conversation provides group members with a continuous gauge of the group's structural features (e.g., its hierarchy, social norms, and shared reality). Therefore, minor changes in the form and flow of group conversation can have considerable consequences for the regulation of social structure.

Uniform and Complementary Social Interaction: Distinct Pathways to Solidarity.

We examine how different forms of co-action give rise to feelings of solidarity. We propose that (a) coordinated action elicits a sense of solidarity, and (b) the process through which such solidarity emerges differs for different forms of co-action. We suggest that whether solidarity within groups emerges from uniform action (e.g. synchronizing, as when people speak in unison) or from more complementary forms of action (e.g. alternating, when speaking in turns) has important consequences for the emergent position of individuals within the group. Uniform action relies on commonality, leaving little scope for individuality. In complementary action each individual makes a distinctive contribution to the group, thereby increasing a sense of personal value to the group, which should contribute to the emergence of solidarity. The predictions receive support from five studies, in which we study groups in laboratory and field settings. Results show that both complementary and uniform co-action increase a sense of solidarity compared to control conditions. However, in the complementary action condition, but not in the uniform action (or synchrony) condition, the effect on feelings of solidarity is mediated by a sense of personal value to the group.

"More than words": social validation in close relationships.

Conversations are susceptible to many disturbances: A speaker's hesitations, distractions, or, when communicating online, technical hiccups that may cause brief delays. Research among previously unacquainted individuals revealed that brief disruptions in conversational flow can have profound social consequences: Silences or delays in mediated communication threaten the need to belong and validate one's ideas. The present research, however, shows that when occurring in close relationships, flow disruptions may be ironically beneficial. We hypothesized that when flow disruptions occur, partners fall back on their relationship beliefs to infer mutual agreement and the existence of a shared reality. When a relationship is perceived as secure, partners may believe that "no words are needed" to understand each other. Flow disruptions can thus paradoxically make shared cognitions accessible and foster feelings of social validation. Data from two experiments, using partners in different types of relationships, supported this hypothesis.

Conversational flow and entitativity: the role of status.

This study examines the process by which perceptions of conversational flow foster an emergent sense of group entitativity. We propose that conversational flow influences more than just the quality of interpersonal relations: it signals entitativity - social unity at the group level. We predicted that when conversations are intermitted by brief silences after a target has spoken, this is perceived as disruptive for targets of low social status within the group: For low-status group members, such pauses raise concerns over respect and inclusion. However, for high-status group members, a similar intermission may be interpreted as an acknowledgement of their distinctive position in the group, and may therefore bolster the hierarchy and unity of the group. Two experiments support these hypotheses. Study 1 (N = 77) manipulated status in conversations of a target participant with confederates. Study 2 (N = 138) replicates the effect among participants who watch a videotaped conversation. Both studies show the predicted pattern, and suggest that belonging (Study 1) and perceived respect (Study 2) may mediate effects of condition on perceptions of group entitativity.

Conversational flow promotes solidarity.

Social interaction is fundamental to the development of various aspects of "we-ness". Previous research has focused on the role the content of interaction plays in establishing feelings of unity, belongingness and shared reality (a cluster of variables referred to as solidarity here). The present paper is less concerned with content, but focuses on the form of social interaction. We propose that the degree to which conversations flow smoothly or not is, of itself, a cue to solidarity. We test this hypothesis in samples of unacquainted and acquainted dyads who communicate via headsets. Conversational flow is disrupted by introducing a delay in the auditory feedback (vs. no delay). Results of three studies show that smoothly coordinated conversations (compared with disrupted conversations and a control condition) increase feelings of belonging and perceptions of group entitativity, independently of conversation content. These effects are driven by the subjective experience of conversational flow. Our data suggest that this process occurs largely beyond individuals' control. We conclude that the form of social interaction is a powerful cue for inferring group solidarity. Implications for the impact of modern communication technology on developing a shared social identity are discussed.

If they were to vote, they would vote for us.

In two field studies, we examined whether voters overestimate support for their political party among nonvoters. In Study 1, voters estimated the percentage of votes their party would receive in an upcoming election, and this percentage increased when voters estimated the percentage of votes their party would receive if nonvoters also were to vote. In Study 2, participants overestimated support for their party even when we made them explicitly aware of current levels of this support by presenting them with poll-based forecasts of election results. Furthermore, Study 2 demonstrated that commitment to vote for a specific party predicted the degree of overestimation. Our results imply that highly committed voters are particularly likely to project support for their party onto nonvoters. Implications for the literature on social projection and social identity are discussed.