Interventions to Reduce Partisan Animosity

Hartman, Rachel; Blakey, Will; Womick, Jake; Bail, Christopher A.; Finkel, Eli J.; Schroeder, Juliana; Sheeran, Paschal; Bavel, Jay Joseph Van; Willer, Robb

doi:10.31234/osf.io/ha2tf

Cited by 13 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 122 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, Lyons (2022) argues that "older Americans do not suffer a particular deficit in such skills and interventions aiming to improve the quality of online news sharing may be better served by instead targeting the increasing partisan animosity among these news consumers" (p. 24). Interventions to reduce partisan animosity propose not only to correct misperceptions (and meta-misperceptions) about the outgroup, but also to highlight commonalities so that partisan identity encompasses the outgroup, develop dialogue skills to communicate across political divides, foster positive contact, and address the institutional factors that give rise to a polarizing environment (Hartman et al, 2022). If successful, such interventions may have a variety of positive effects that goes beyond reducing belief in misinformation.…”

Section: Reduce Partisan Animositymentioning

confidence: 99%

How Effective Are Interventions Against Misinformation?

Altay¹

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Efforts to combat misinformation have intensified in recent years. In parallel, our scientific understanding of misinformation and of our information ecosystem has improved. Yet, many interventions against misinformation have failed to properly consider and adapt to this growing body of knowledge. First, because misinformation consumption is low in western democracies, interventions against misinformation are bound to have minimal effects outside of experimental settings, especially compared to interventions aimed at increasing the acceptance of reliable information. Second, because people tend to distrust unreliable sources but fail to sufficiently trust reliable sources, there is much more room to improve trust in reliable sources than to reduce trust in unreliable sources. Third, because misinformation is largely a symptom of deeper socio-political problems, most interventions are doomed to play a game of ‘whack-a- mole’, and should instead try to address root causes, such as by reducing partisan animosity. Fourth, because a small number of powerful individuals give misinformation most of its visibility, interventions targeting laypeople will have small effects compared to interventions targeting these powerful individuals. Fifth, because false information is not necessarily harmful and true information can be used in misleading ways, defining misinformation in terms of misleadingness instead of veracity could help interventions have a stronger societal impact. Policymakers, journalists, and researchers would benefit from taking these facts into account when designing solutions against misinformation.

show abstract

Section: Reduce Partisan Animositymentioning

confidence: 99%

How Effective Are Interventions Against Misinformation?

Altay¹

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Considering US attitudes towards immigration, Captari et al (2019) found that greater CH corresponded with lower prejudice, lower perceived threat from the other and greater openness to immigration. Promoting constructive dialogue and positive intergroup contact may be effective relational or systemic level interventions to counteract polarisation (Captari et al, 2019; Hartman et al, 2022), whereas individual‐level interventions can focus on challenging preconceived notions and falsehoods about the other and identifying points of shared humanity, that is, “possible bridges” between self and other (Hartman et al, 2022; Rober & De Haene, 2014, p. 18). Examination of the effectiveness of CH interventions to bridge differences and improve relational dynamics is greatly needed.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A practice‐based study of cultural humility and well‐being among psychotherapy clients

Choe

Jankowski

Sandage

et al. 2022

Couns and Psychother Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One trend in psychotherapy research involves examining client factors to better understand change. Some have framed client factors as virtues. Humility is one virtue that has gained attention with evidence that suggests humility may help facilitate therapeutic change. A specific type of humility, cultural humility, however, has not been closely examined as a client factor. Cultural humility is a relational virtue that addresses an individual's ability to be open towards cultural differences and can be helpful in buffering diverse relational dynamics (e.g., student and teacher, family members and friends with different beliefs). In this study, we examined client change in cultural humility and well-being using group-based trajectory modelling. We also examined differentiation as a predictor of trajectory membership and compared trajectories on levels of symptoms. Results suggested that a subgroup of clients showed significant increases in cultural humility and well-being. Further analyses found that clients with higher levels of initial differentiation were more likely to belong to the growth trajectory. This same trajectory also decreased in symptoms over time.

show abstract

“…Instead, the current research suggests that messages by recently‐swayed skeptics that emphasize commonalities and appreciate different group virtues should be more effective. Two registered reports confirmed behavioral effects of message source, indicating that ISE processes are prime‐candidates to consider to mend societal divides (Hartman et al., 2022).…”

Section: Practical Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 92%

Behavioral consequences of intergroup sensitivity

Thürmer

McCrea

2022

Social & Personality Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Communication of criticism between groups is important to productive societal discourse, but may serve to inflame conflict. The defensive rejection of intergroup, relative to intragroup, criticism (intergroup sensitivity effect [ISE]) may contribute to such divides. The ISE has been observed in self-report measures, but such measures are weak and biased predictors of actual (divisive) behavior. We review recent research demonstrating that the ISE does have costly behavioral consequences. We next consider the debate concerning whether the ISE reflects defense of a valued social identity or enforcement of a conversational norm. We therefore review recent evidence for an ISE among individuals lacking identification with the target of the criticism. Third, we examine how the ISE may affect a variety of behaviors relevant to societal divisions, including political reconciliation, environmental sustainability, and vaccination. Lastly, we outline future research that can clarify the underlying mechanisms of the ISE and promote conciliatory intergroup behavior.

show abstract

Interventions to Reduce Partisan Animosity

Cited by 13 publications

References 122 publications

How Effective Are Interventions Against Misinformation?

How Effective Are Interventions Against Misinformation?

A practice‐based study of cultural humility and well‐being among psychotherapy clients

Behavioral consequences of intergroup sensitivity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About