Abstract: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 (<i>N</i> = 1,236) and Trump supporters (<i>N</i> = 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 Psychology of Left-Right Political Polarization; and an Experimental Intervention for Curbing Partisan Animosity and Support for Antidemocratic Violence

Cognitive–motivational mechanisms of political polarization in social-communicative contexts

Opinion Polarization by Learning from Social Feedback

Preventing extreme polarization of political attitudes

Dynamics of Affective Polarization: From Consensus to Partisan Divides

Liberal-conservative asymmetries in anti-democratic tendencies are partly explained by psychological differences in a nationally representative U.S. sample

The Partisan Brain

Political psycholinguistics: A comprehensive analysis of the language habits of liberal and conservative social media users.

Megastudy testing 25 treatments to reduce antidemocratic attitudes and partisan animosity

Rediscovering Tomkins’ polarity theory: Humanism, normativism, and the psychological basis of left-right ideological conflict in the U.S. and Sweden

Psychological Barriers to Bipartisan Public Support for Climate Policy

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

The Great Divide: Drivers of Polarization in the US Public

Reducing Polarization on Abortion, Guns and Immigration: An Experimental Study

Biased processing and opinion polarization: experimental refinement of argument communication theory in the context of the energy debate

Political Polarization: Challenges, Opportunities, and Hope for Consumer Welfare, Marketers, and Public Policy

Partisan animosity through the lens of blame: Partisan animosity can be reduced by a historicist thinking intervention

Countering Political Polarization Through Conscious and Unconscious Integrative Complexity

Correcting misperceptions of partisan opponents is not effective at treating democratic ills

Affective and interactional polarization align across countries

Motivated reasoning and political ideology fueled political polarization regarding COVID-19 health recommendations in Spanish society: an experimental study