Sympathizing With the Radical Right: Effects of Mainstream Party Recognition and Control of Prejudice

A new paper in the Journal of Social and Political Psychology about how mainstream party recognition increase sympathy for the radical right.

The electoral success of radical right parties throughout Western Europe is the biggest change to these formerly stable party systems. Several studies have identified that mainstream parties can shape the trajectory of radical right parties. Our aim is to contribute to this literature, and to investigate if and how radical right parties gain from mainstream party recognition. Theoretically, we draw on the literature that has suggested that when aiming to explain the legitimization of radical right parties, we need to consider that many individuals in Western Europe are influenced by an anti-prejudice norm when forming preferences towards such parties. We hypothesize that when mainstream parties signal that it is acceptable to associate with radical right parties' they challenge the anti-prejudice norm that dissuade voters from such parties. In addition, individuals with lower internal motivation to control prejudice (IMCP) are more susceptible to be affected by mainstream party recognition of radical right parties as those with high IMCP have a stronger internalized anti-prejudice norm. We evaluate the effects of changes in the normative context in a survey experiment (N = 1133) by manipulating mainstream party legitimization of a radical right party, the Sweden Democrats, before the Swedish parliamentary election in 2018. Our results suggest that when mainstream parties challenge the anti-prejudice norm, individuals are more likely to sympathize with radical right parties. Moreover, the effect of mainstream party recognition is moderated by IMCP-individuals with a low motivation to appear non-prejudiced are more influenced by mainstream party legitimization of a radical right party.

The article can be found here.

Protecting the Ingroup? Authoritarianism, Immigration Attitudes, and Affective Polarization

A new paper on the effects of RWA on affective polarization is out in Journal of Social and Political Psychology.

What makes people affectively polarized? Affective polarization is based on the idea that partisanship can be a social identity leading to polarization in the form of intergroup distancing between the own party and the other parties. In this study, we argue that perceived threats from an outgroup can spur affective polarization. To investigate this, we use the issue of immigration, often framed as a threat by right-wing groups, to examine whether individual-level differences influence how sensititivity to the perception of immigration as a threat. One such factor is the trait right-wing authoritarianism (RWA), which is characterized by emphasis on submission to authority and upholding norms of social order. The emphasis among individuals with this trait on protecting the ingroup from threats means that negativity toward immigration is likely to extend toward political opponents, resulting in an increase in affective polarization. Thus, we hypothesize that the affective polarization is likely to increase when individuals interpret immigration as threatening, particularly for the individuals who are high in RWA aggression. We evaluate and find support for this claim using a large-scale survey performed in Sweden ( N = 898). The results, showing a conditional effect of immigration attitudes on affective polarization, are consistent across three commonly used measures of affective polarization as follows: trait ratings, a social distance measure, and feeling thermometers. Overall, our results show that it is important to consider intergroup threats and intergroup differences in the context of sensitivity to such threats when explaining affective polarization.

The paper can be found here.

University Day

As a fairly recently hired associate professor, Emma was presented on the University Day at Kristianstad University. Here she is talking about our research on affective polarization with the head of the University.

Student thesis on misogynistic radicalization

Kim Holm and Matilda Plume, clinical psychologist program at the University of Gothenburg, has written a thesis on misogynistic radicalization with Emma as supervisor. The thesis is entitled: Misogynistic radicalization on the Manosphere – exploring the effects of entitlement and negative emotions  can be downloaded here.

Abstract

During the last decade the online milieu known as the manosphere has been connected to numerous lethal deeds and acts of violence against women. The overarching purpose of this study was to gain a deepened understanding of the processes of online misogynistic radicalization. Drawing on theories on radicalization, masculinity, and the effects of emotions, we designed and conducted an online survey-based experiment to examine how average men can become misogynistically radicalized towards using or condoning violence. The experiment randomly assigned 596 American men to read fictional tweets designed to either threaten their masculine social identity or to be non-threatening. We used a model of moderated mediation, with entitlement as a moderator and negative emotions as mediators between the threat condition and measures of misogynistic radicalization. Our results showed that threatening messages increased negative emotions. Specific emotions had unique effects, with disgust and fear increasing measures of radicalization. Additionally, the effects of disgust on radicalization were moderated by degree of entitlement. Our results provide experimental evidence for processes of misogynistic radicalization occurring online, and its relevance to the general radicalization research field is discussed.

Interview in the magazine Expo

Emma was recently interviewed in the magazine Expo talking about our recent results on perceptions of threat and affective polarization.

Our research featured in The Guardian

Our research on radicalization was referred to in the Guardian. The article is found here.

Interview in Dagens Nyheter

Emma was recently interviewed about radicalization and polarization in relation to the vaccine debate. The interview was published in Dagens Nyheters Insidan and can be found here (in Swedish).

Student thesis on affective polarization

Ida Larsson at the Department of Psychology, University of Gothenburg has authored a thesis about variations in affective polarization depending on specific traits related to different ideological stances using data from SOM. The thesis can be found here (in Swedish).

Emma on Swedish radio about radicalization process

Emma was on Swedish radio talking about our research on social factors behind radicalization. The program is found here, about 12 mins into the show.

Affective polarization in a multiparty system

Intergroup Threat and Affective Polarization in a Multi-Party System

Emma A. Renström, Hanna Bäck & Royce Carroll

Abstract

What explains affective polarization among voters and societal groups? Much of the existing literature focusing on mass political polarization in modern democracies originates in the US, where studies have shown that, while ideological separation has grown, political conflict increasingly reflects social identity divisions rather than policy disagreements, resulting in affective polarization. We focus on explaining such polarization in a multi-party context. Drawing on social identity theory and intergroup threat theory, we hypothesize that individuals who perceive an intergroup threat show stronger intergroup differentiation and increased affective polarization. We analyze the influence of perceived threat on affective polarization drawing on two large-scale representative surveys in Sweden (N = 1429 and 1343). We show that individual-level affective polarization is related to perceived intergroup threats among the voters in both studies, measuring affective polarization using social distance, negative trait attribution, and party like-dislike ratings.

Find the full paper published in Journal of Social and Political Psychology here.

New article on personality and compliance with recommendations during Covid

Who Follows the Rules During a Crisis?—Personality Traits and Trust as Predictors of Compliance With Containment Recommendations During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Yvonne Schmeisser, Emma A. Renström & Hanna Bäck

When the COVID-19 pandemic hit in 2020, many governments tried to contain the spread of the virus by legally restricting social life and imposing national lockdowns. The Swedish government did not enforce a national lockdown, but instead appealed to the individual’s self-responsibility to follow specific containment recommendations developed by the Swedish Public Health Agency. Sweden is thus an especially interesting case to study because of the potential influence of psychological and attitudinal individual-level factors that might contribute to compliance with containment recommendations. Drawing on previous literature on how individuals respond during health crises, we define and evaluate a mediation model that considers the role of personality traits and trust authorities to explain compliance. More specifically, we argue that we need to consider the role of trust in authorities to better understand the relationship between personality traits and compliance. In analyses based on a large-scale representative survey (N = 1,034), we find Conscientiousness to be directly linked to compliance, whereas Agreeableness, Neuroticism and Openness were indirectly related to compliance when trust in the Public Health Agency was taken into account.

Find the full paper published in Frontiers in Political Science here.

Emma has started a new position at Högskolan Kristianstad

From 1st of August, Emma has a new position at Högskolan Kristianstad.

Two new articles on the political psychology of Covid-19

In two recent papers, we explore the role of emotions in reactions to Covid-19 policies, political actions and health-related behaviors. The papers are published open access and are linked below.

Anxiety, Compassion and Pride. How emotions elicited by the Governments handling of Covid-19 influences health-promoting behaviors.

Emotions during the Covid-19 pandemic: Fear, anxiety and anger as mediators between threats and policy support and political actions.

Polarized democracy - presentation at webinar

Emma and Hanna have written a policy brief about the project Polarized democracy. The policy brief can be found here (only in Swedish).

The policy brief was presented at a webinar arranged by the Migration Studies Delegation and The Swedish Research Council. If you are interested in viewing the webinar, a recording of it will be posted on Delmi’s website.

Master thesis on intergroup threat, emotions and political attitudes and actions

Recently, the master thesis Threat and sensibility: An experiment on the effects of intergroup threat and emotions on political attitudes and actions, by Engla Olhagen Halling and Hector Wall, supervised by Emma, was defended at Lund University. The thesis can be downloaded here.

Abstract

This study aimed to investigate the influence of threat inducing right-wing

populist communication on emotions, attitude and political action intentions. The

study applied an experimental design and was conducted on a UK sample. Participants

(N=390) were randomly assigned to one of three conditions; realistic threat, symbolic

threat or control group. After reading condition-specific vignettes, participants

answered questions regarding their emotions, followed by questions on attitudes

toward immigrants, support for policies concerning immigration and intention to take

political action. Results showed that participants exposed to the realistic threat

condition rated significantly higher scores on measures of anti-immigrant attitudes and

policy support but not on political action intentions. Both threat manipulations elicited

significantly higher levels of negative emotions compared to the control condition. In

the realistic threat condition, anger mediated increased anti-immigrant attitudes and

policy support, whereas, in the symbolic threat condition, disgust mediated increased

anti-immigrant attitudes. In conclusion, this study found some evidence that emotions

contribute to the perception and evaluation of threatening communication. The study

concludes that emotional responses to daily news may impact our attitudes.

Keywords: Intergroup threat theory, political attitudes, political action, mediation

analysis

Poster presented at the Association for Psychological Science virtual conference

26-27 May was the APS virtual conference where Yvonne presented some of our work on the interplay between the Big five and trust on compliance with recommendations during Covid-19.

The poster can be found here.

New paper about party cue effects on attitudes to a policy proposal

A new paper authored by Hanna, Emma and Annika Fredén was recently published in Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties.

This article focuses on how party identity can shape policy support or opposition to the controversial issue of legalizing cannabis in Sweden, which is strongly opposed by the public. In a survey experiment (N = 3612), we manipulated if a message that supported or opposed a policy proposal to legalize cannabis was presented by a representative of the own party or an outgroup party. Results showed increased opposition to the proposal when the ingroup party opposed the policy and when the outgroup party endorsed the policy. When the ingroup party endorsed the policy and when the outgroup party opposed the policy, attitudes to the policy were not influenced. We argue that prior attitudes moderate how ingroup- and outgroup party messages are processed and that voters do not blindly follow the party line. Only when the own party presents a position that coincides with the individual’s prior position, are attitudes strengthened and voters follow the party line. Attitudes are also strengthened as a way to increase distance to a disliked outgroup party. When the party cue contradicts prior beliefs (ingroup-endorse; outgroup-oppose), the information is ignored, which allows individuals to retain their view of the party, be it positive or negative.

The paper can be found here.

New research assistant

Recently, Britta started as our new research assistant. Britta is a licensed psychologist based in Gothenburg. Her research interest lies in how globalization and immigration are shaping modern politics, and how social and group psychology can help explain political polarization and radicalization. 

Britta is specifically interested in ways in which emotions and intergroup dynamics are shaping decision-making processes and attitudinal shifts, and how such knowledge can be used to prevent further polarization. Britta has a background in clinical and applied research, investigating long-term effects of stress-related exhaustion as well as school interventions to build psychological resilience in children.

Thesis on changes in affective polarization during Covid-19

Recently, Anton Ekman, defended his licensed psychologist thesis at the University of Gothenburg. The thesis explored if affective polarization in Sweden had changed as a consequence of Covid-19. The thesis can be found here (only in Swedish). He found that left-wing oriented individuals had increased in affective polarization from 2019 before Covid19 to during Covid19 (August, 2020), while right-wing oriented people had become less polarized. The results are discussed in relation to the Swedish approach to handling Covid-19, and the political landscape in Sweden.

Exploring a pathway to radicalization. New paper out!

We recently published this 4-study article in Group Processes and Intergroup Relations special issue on Radicalization and violent extremism. The issue can be found here, and our article is open-access here.