Search results

The article reports two experiments that examined politicization in the name of the majority population and intergroup polarization as a function of perceived grievances of the majority population. To manipulate perceived majority grievances, we used three different injustice frames (cultural, economic, political), each of which targeted an important arena of societal participation and thus a typical breeding ground for societal injustices and psychological grievances. In addition, both experiments included a (no frame) control condition. The samples recruited for the two experiments differed from each other in (left–right) political orientation and consequently in their perceptions of and reactions to potential majority grievances. The most striking differential influences were observed for the cultural grievance symbolized by the political correctness norm. However, both experiments provided evidence that majority politicization mediates the effect of majority grievances on intergroup polarization and that, in contrast to the divisive role of majority politicization, majority solidarity likely fosters social inclusion.

The article reports two experiments that examined politicization in the name of the majority population and intergroup polarization as a function of perceived grievances of the majority population. To manipulate perceived majority grievances, we used three different injustice frames (cultural, economic, political), each of which targeted an important arena of societal participation and thus a typical breeding ground for societal injustices and psychological grievances. In addition, both experiments included a (no frame) control condition. The samples recruited for the two experiments differed from each other in (left–right) political orientation and consequently in their perceptions of and reactions to potential majority grievances. The most striking differential influences were observed for the cultural grievance symbolized by the political correctness norm. However, both experiments provided evidence that majority politicization mediates the effect of majority grievances on intergroup polarization and that, in contrast to the divisive role of majority politicization, majority solidarity likely fosters social inclusion. ; peerReviewed ; publishedVersion

In (post-)modern, plural societies, consisting of numerous subgroups, mutual respect between groups plays a central role for a constructive social and political life. In this article, we examine whether group members' perception of being respected by outgroups fosters respect for these outgroups. In Study 1, we employed a panel sample of supporters of the Tea Party movement in the United States (N = 422). In Study 2, we employed a panel sample of members of the LGBTI community in Germany (N = 262). As disapproved target outgroups, we chose in Study 1 homosexuals in the United States, while in Study 2, we chose supporters of the German populist, right-wing political party "Alternative für Deutschland". Our studies thus constituted a complementary, nearly symmetrical constellation of a liberal group and a conservative political group each. Among Tea Party movement supporters, respect from a disapproved outgroup consistently predicted respect for that outgroup. Among German LGBTI community members, this effect of respect from a disapproved outgroup was found in some of our analyses. For this latter sample, there was furthermore a tendency of societal respect to predict respect for a disapproved outgroup longitudinally. Additionally, we observed for both of our samples that respect from other ingroup members decreased respect for a disapproved outgroup. The dynamics of mutual respect in these two complementary intergroup contexts are discussed as well as the importance of direct intergroup reciprocity and superordinate group membership as routes to mutual respect. ; peerReviewed ; publishedVersion

In (post-)modern, plural societies, consisting of numerous subgroups, mutual respect between groups plays a central role for a constructive social and political life. In this article, we examine whether group members' perception of being respected by outgroups fosters respect for these outgroups. In Study 1, we employed a panel sample of supporters of the Tea Party movement in the United States (N = 422). In Study 2, we employed a panel sample of members of the LGBTI community in Germany (N = 262). As disapproved target outgroups, we chose in Study 1 homosexuals in the United States, while in Study 2, we chose supporters of the German populist, right-wing political party "Alternative für Deutschland". Our studies thus constituted a complementary, nearly symmetrical constellation of a liberal group and a conservative political group each. Among Tea Party movement supporters, respect from a disapproved outgroup consistently predicted respect for that outgroup. Among German LGBTI community members, this effect of respect from a disapproved outgroup was found in some of our analyses. For this latter sample, there was furthermore a tendency of societal respect to predict respect for a disapproved outgroup longitudinally. Additionally, we observed for both of our samples that respect from other ingroup members decreased respect for a disapproved outgroup. The dynamics of mutual respect in these two complementary intergroup contexts are discussed as well as the importance of direct intergroup reciprocity and superordinate group membership as routes to mutual respect.

Political polarization between conservatives and liberals threatens democratic societies. Ameliorating liberal research participants' negative feelings, evaluations, and stereotypes towards conservatives might be one step into the direction of a political depolarization. In a sample of U.S.-American liberal research participants recruited via Amazon's Mechanical Turk (N = 271), we randomly assigned participants in a pre-post-design either to a clinical-psychological, metacognitive-intervention (MCT), an educational, or a no-treatment-no-pre-measurement-control-condition. In the MCT-condition, participants were first asked seemingly simple questions that frequently elicited incorrect responses, followed by corrective information. In the educational condition, information was conveyed in a simple narrative form. MCT was significantly more effective in ameliorating liberal participants' negative feelings, evaluations, and stereotypes towards conservatives compared to the other two control-conditions. Further, MCT-participants significantly reduced their negative feelings, negative evaluations, and perceptions of threat from pre- to post-measurement, significantly more than participants in the educational condition. The results of our preliminary study and its implications are discussed, and recommendations for further research are made. ; peerReviewed ; publishedVersion

Political polarization between conservatives and liberals threatens democratic societies. Ameliorating liberal research participants' negative feelings, evaluations, and stereotypes towards conservatives might be one step into the direction of a political depolarization. In a sample of U.S.-American liberal research participants recruited via Amazon's Mechanical Turk (N = 271), we randomly assigned participants in a pre-post-design either to a clinical-psychological, metacognitive-intervention (MCT), an educational, or a no-treatment-no-pre-measurement-control-condition. In the MCT-condition, participants were first asked seemingly simple questions that frequently elicited incorrect responses, followed by corrective information. In the educational condition, information was conveyed in a simple narrative form. MCT was significantly more effective in ameliorating liberal participants' negative feelings, evaluations, and stereotypes towards conservatives compared to the other two control-conditions. Further, MCT-participants significantly reduced their negative feelings, negative evaluations, and perceptions of threat from pre- to post-measurement, significantly more than participants in the educational condition. The results of our preliminary study and its implications are discussed, and recommendations for further research are made.

Selten war die gesellschaftliche Mitte so "gefordert" wie heute. Rechtsextremismus, Populismus, Rassismus setzen ihr zu. Alle zwei Jahre untersucht die Mitte-Studie der Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung rechtsextreme und demokratiegefährdende Einstellungen in der deutschen Gesellschaft. Die aktuelle repräsentative Umfrage von Dezember 2020 bis Frühjahr 2021 zeigt: Die "Mitte" ist gefordert, Haltung zu zeigen, Position zu beziehen und ihre Demokratie zu stärken! Dazu hat sie das Potenzial. Hasskampagnen, Gewalt, rechter Terror und neue rechte Gruppen haben die Mitte in den vergangenen Jahren getroffen. Nun kommt die Coronapandemie mit globalen Unsicherheiten und unkalkulierbaren Folgekrisen dazu. Was heißt das für die demokratische Orientierung der Gesellschaft? Die hier vorliegende Mitte-Studie 2020/21 erkennt sowohl Entwicklungen, die die Demokratie fördern, als auch solche, die sie gefährden. Die Mitte selbst schätzt den Rechtsextremismus als größte Bedrohung für die Demokratie ein, und hierin liegt die Chance, ihm zu begegnen

Selten war die gesellschaftliche Mitte so "gefordert" wie heute. Rechtsextremismus, Populismus, Rassismus setzen ihr zu. Alle zwei Jahre untersucht die Mitte-Studie der Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung rechtsextreme und demokratiegefährdende Einstellungen in der deutschen Gesellschaft. Die aktuelle repräsentative Umfrage von Dezember 2020 bis Frühjahr 2021 zeigt: Die "Mitte" ist gefordert, Haltung zu zeigen, Position zu beziehen und ihre Demokratie zu stärken! Dazu hat sie das Potenzial. Hasskampagnen, Gewalt, rechter Terror und neue rechte Gruppen haben die Mitte in den vergangenen Jahren getroffen. Nun kommt die Coronapandemie mit globalen Unsicherheiten und unkalkulierbaren Folgekrisen dazu. Was heißt das für die demokratische Orientierung der Gesellschaft? Die hier vorliegende Mitte-Studie 2020/21 erkennt sowohl Entwicklungen, die die Demokratie fördern, als auch solche, die sie gefährden. Die Mitte selbst schätzt den Rechtsextremismus als größte Bedrohung für die Demokratie ein, und hierin liegt die Chance, ihm zu begegnen