"Fight like hell": Projected moral polarisation predicts anticipated conflict and the perceived responsibility to overturn an election loss

Charlie R. Crimston,Jolanda Jetten,Hema Preya Selvanathan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302231223896

2024-02-16

Group Processes & Intergroup Relations

Abstract:Group Processes &Intergroup Relations, Ahead of Print. Losing an election can be a huge blow. As a result, most elections are associated with a mixture of trepidation and optimism (outgroup vs. ingroup political party winning, respectively). However, we propose that levels of anxiety and future dread in the context of an election are enhanced when society is characterised by deep intergroup divisions and morally charged polarisation. Across two studies spanning two national elections (the 2020 U.S. presidential election and the 2021 Dutch general election; N = 1,079), we examined support for the prediction that projected moral polarisation in the aftermath of an election would be associated with enhanced perceived negative consequences of losing that election (i.e., an outgroup political party winning power). We consistently found that projected moral polarisation when anticipating an election loss predicted enhanced anxiety concerning the future state of society (collective angst), higher perceived likelihood of civil war, and a stronger perceived obligation to fight to overturn the results of the election. Moreover, this association was mediated by the perceived breakdown of leadership in society. The current findings have important implications for understanding the societal and political consequences of moral polarisation, including the potential for enhanced intergroup conflict and threats to democracy.

psychology, social