This is data for four separate studies (1 observational, 3 experimental). The research question asks whether protecting the partisan ingroup or denigrating partisan out-group is psychologically primary. It also tests whether partisans can be easily moved to denigrate the out-group (in a forced choice scenario) by exposing them to a moral threat to their own party before making this choice. Study 1 gives people a basic forced choice scenario. Study 2 adds the moral threat prior to the choice. Study 3 has the same moral threat but adds an "opt out" option in the forced choice. Study 4 changes the moral threat so it is more personal and "close to home"
In everyday life, we are faced with disparate examples of intergroup bias, ranging from a mild tende...
Partisan respondents evaluated a potential party leader (Study 1) or an ingroup political candidate ...
As one of the biggest problems of the century, intergroup conflict has drawn much attention in socia...
The discrepancy between ingroup favoritism and outgroup hostility is well established in social psyc...
When defined in terms of social identity and affect toward co-partisans and opposing partisans, the ...
In intergroup conflict, individual cooperation may be directed at strengthening the ingroup, thus un...
At least two theories have been offered that explain the rise of affective polarization. Some schola...
In everyday life, we are faced with disparate examples of intergroup bias, ranging from a mild tende...
Prior research shows that partisan bias affects evaluations of people in nonpolitical settings, but ...
Partisan respondents evaluated a potential party leader (Study 1) or an ingroup political candidate ...
An enduring and increasingly acute concern – in an age of polarized parties – is that people’s parti...
People tend to voluntarily sacrifice their own interests to reject unfair proposals, and this behavi...
Data to replicate the results presented in "What Content Drives Political Polarization? Comparing th...
Does media choice cause polarization, or merely reflect it? We investigate a critical aspect of this...
In everyday life, we are faced with disparate examples of intergroup bias, ranging from a mild tende...
In everyday life, we are faced with disparate examples of intergroup bias, ranging from a mild tende...
Partisan respondents evaluated a potential party leader (Study 1) or an ingroup political candidate ...
As one of the biggest problems of the century, intergroup conflict has drawn much attention in socia...
The discrepancy between ingroup favoritism and outgroup hostility is well established in social psyc...
When defined in terms of social identity and affect toward co-partisans and opposing partisans, the ...
In intergroup conflict, individual cooperation may be directed at strengthening the ingroup, thus un...
At least two theories have been offered that explain the rise of affective polarization. Some schola...
In everyday life, we are faced with disparate examples of intergroup bias, ranging from a mild tende...
Prior research shows that partisan bias affects evaluations of people in nonpolitical settings, but ...
Partisan respondents evaluated a potential party leader (Study 1) or an ingroup political candidate ...
An enduring and increasingly acute concern – in an age of polarized parties – is that people’s parti...
People tend to voluntarily sacrifice their own interests to reject unfair proposals, and this behavi...
Data to replicate the results presented in "What Content Drives Political Polarization? Comparing th...
Does media choice cause polarization, or merely reflect it? We investigate a critical aspect of this...
In everyday life, we are faced with disparate examples of intergroup bias, ranging from a mild tende...
In everyday life, we are faced with disparate examples of intergroup bias, ranging from a mild tende...
Partisan respondents evaluated a potential party leader (Study 1) or an ingroup political candidate ...
As one of the biggest problems of the century, intergroup conflict has drawn much attention in socia...