Extremists on the Left and Right Use Angry, Negative Language

Frimer, Jeremy A.; Brandt, Mark J.; Melton, Zachary John; Motyl, Matt

doi:10.1177/0146167218809705

Cited by 46 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This finding runs counter to the rigidity of the right hypothesis, which asserts that a propensity to maintain a clear and consistent worldview is most pronounced among conservatives (Feldman & Johnson, 2014;Hibbing et al, 2014;Jost et al, 2003;Malka & Soto, 2015;van Hiel et al, 2010). Further, this approach to avoiding and disparaging outgroup opinionsand, in particular, feeling threatened by such viewpointsmay also be reflected in the symmetric use of angry and otherwise negative language by ideological extremists on both the political left and right (Frimer, Brandt, Melton, & Motyl, 2019). These findings could be related to a lack of cognitive flexibility on the parts of ideological extremists.…”

Section: Political Partisans As Symmetricmentioning

confidence: 87%

Ideological measurement in social and political psychology

Ca¹

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As the domains of social and personality psychological science undergo marked changes in their approach to research (e.g., open science practices, and addressing the replication crisis), it is important to undertake a full review of the tools and measures that we have at our disposal.In addition, the growing sense of political and ideological polarization in contemporary western democracies necessitates a coherent and internally consistent approach to studying politically and ideologically sensitive topics. This paper explores the measurement and study of such topics, and posits that claims about (a)symmetries between ideological partisans may be rooted in different measurement approaches. A more consistent and ecologically valid approach to studying partisan engagement with political topics is advocated, focusing on situational responses to ideologically salient scenarios, rather than placing our focus on results from decontextualized self-report individual difference measures. Suggestions for broader debiasing research reforms are also explored. Ideological measurement in social and political psychologyThe landscape of social psychology is currently undergoing some stark changes.Emerging practices to address the 'replication crisis' (Brandt et al., 2014;Lindsay, 2015) and the advent of increasingly open research practices, such as data-and materials-sharing, protocol and analytic pre-registration, and the peer-review of research plans before data are collected and results are known (Chambers, 2018;van't Veer & Giner-Sorolla, 2016; have led the field to consider some of the questionable research practices that have historically persisted in some spheres .Although these movements are clearly positive for the state of our science, they focus only on the higher-level processes associated with potential biases in research design and execution. This paper begins by looking at the 'nuts and bolts' of social and personality psychological research, as applied in the political domain, to explore potential sources of ideological bias in the conceptualization and interpretation of ideologies. That is, there is an argument to be made that our current approaches to studying similarities and differences between those from competing political or ideological persuasions (from here, these similarities and differences are referred to as 'political/ideological (a)symmetries') may contain epistemic biases on the part of the field in the aggregate. In doing so, a critique of commonly used measurement tools in the political psychology domain is offered, and further suggestions for alternative approaches to researching ideological (a)symmetries are offered that are consistent with the continuing the recent advances in social psychological research.

show abstract

Section: Political Partisans As Symmetricmentioning

confidence: 87%

Ideological measurement in social and political psychology

Ca¹

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Accordingly, mainstream outlets and psychologists have reported much online activity from the extreme left and right [40,41]. While PC is widespread, several authors have observed AR proponents sanitize their ideology for public consumption through antagonistic memes satirizing PC culture and progressivism in general [13,14].…”

Section: News and Social Mediamentioning

confidence: 99%

Political correctness and the alt-right: The development of extreme political attitudes

Moss

O’Connor

2020

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent studies have documented a shift from moderate political attitudes to more extreme attitudes at the ends of the political spectrum. This can be seen in Political Correctness (PC) on the left, and white identitarian (WI) attitudes on the 'Alt-Right' (AR). While highly covered in mainstream media, limited academic research has investigated their possible antecedents and psychological correlates. The current study investigated the prevalence and psychological predictors of these attitudes. Utilising a quota-based sample of 512 U.S. participants, we found that extreme political attitudes were associated with various personality traits, social media use, and upbringing. PC attitudes were associated with agreeableness, black-white thinking, social-media use, and perceived overprotective parenting. WI attitudes were associated with low agreeableness and openness, and high black-white thinking. Our results show that extreme left and right attitudes are separated by individual differences, and that authoritarianism can be seen on both the left and the right.

show abstract

“…Extant research in moral psychology suggests that when an issue is construed as moral, it evokes moral emotions such as disgust or anger (Haidt, 2003;Tangney, Stuewig, & Mashek, 2007), and comes to be perceived as universal (Skitka, Bauman, & Sargis, 2005;van Bavel, Packer, Haas, & Cunningham, 2012) and beyond compromise (for a recent review see Rhee, Schein, & Bastian, 2019;Ryan, 2017;Skitka, 2010). Such changes in the construal of the moralized attitude affects interpersonal interaction, often causing individuals to try to distance themselves from alternative viewpoints (Frimer, Brandt, Melton, & Motyl, 2019;Wright, Cullum, & Schwab, 2008), and even perceive opinions on the relevant idea in question as more polarized (Anderson et al, 2014;Ryan, 2017), which can in turn lead to erosion of social trust (Rapp, 2016).…”

Section: The Problem With Moral Rhetoricmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why moral advocacy leads to polarization and proselytization: The role of self-persuasion

Abeywickrama

Rhee

Crone

et al. 2020

J. Soc. Polit. Psych.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research is the first to examine the effects of moral versus practical pro-attitudinal advocacy in the context of self-persuasion. We validate a novel advocacy paradigm aimed at uncovering why moral advocacy leads to polarization and proselytization. We investigate four distinct possibilities: (1) expression of moral foundational values (harm, fairness, loyalty, authority, purity), (2) reliance on moral systems (deontology and consequentialism), (3) expression of moral outrage, (4) increased confidence in one’s advocacy attempt. In Study 1 (N = 255) we find differences between moral and practical advocacy on the five moral foundations, deontology, and moral outrage. In Study 2 (N = 218) we replicate these differences, but find that only the expression of moral foundations is consequential in predicting attitude polarization. In Study 3 (N = 115) we replicate the effect of moral foundations on proselytization. Our findings suggest that practical compared to moral advocacy may attenuate polarization and proselytization. This carries implications for how advocacy can be re-framed in ways which minimize social conflict.

show abstract

Extremists on the Left and Right Use Angry, Negative Language

Cited by 46 publications

References 60 publications

Ideological measurement in social and political psychology

Ideological measurement in social and political psychology

Political correctness and the alt-right: The development of extreme political attitudes

Why moral advocacy leads to polarization and proselytization: The role of self-persuasion

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About