The general fault in our fault lines

Research output: Working paperPreprintResearch

  • Kai Ruggeri
  • Bojana Većkalov
  • Lana Bojanić
  • Thomas Lind Andersen
  • Sarah Ashcroft-Jones
  • Nélida Ayacaxli
  • Paula Barea Arroyo
  • Mari Louise Berge
  • Ludvig Daae Bjørndal
  • Aslı Bursalıoğlu
  • Vanessa Bühler
  • Martin Čadek
  • Melis Çetinçelik
  • Anna Cortijos-Bernabeu
  • Kaja Damnjanović
  • Tatianna M. Dugue
  • Maya Esberg
  • Celia Esteban Serna
  • Ezra N. Felder
  • Maja Friedemann
  • Darianna I. Frontera Villanueva
  • Patricia Gale
  • Eduardo Garcia-Garzon
  • Sandra Jeanette Geiger
  • Leya George
  • Allegra Girardello
  • Aleksandra Gracheva
  • Anastasia Gracheva
  • Carolina Diaz Guillory
  • Marlene Hecht
  • Katharina Herte
  • Barbora Hubená
  • William Ingalls
  • Lea Jakob
  • Margo Janssens
  • Hannes Jarke
  • Ondřej Kácha
  • Kalina Nikolova Kalinova
  • Ralitsa Karakasheva
  • Peggah Khorrami
  • Zan Lep
  • Samuel Lins
  • Ingvild Sandø Lofthus
  • Salomé Mamede
  • Silvana Mareva
  • Mafalda F. Mascarenhas
  • Lucy McGill
  • Sara Morales-Izquierdo
  • Bettina Moltrecht
  • Tasja Sophie Mueller
  • Marzia Musetti
  • Joakim Nelsson
  • Thiago Otto
  • Alessandro Paul
  • Irena Pavlović
  • Marija Petrović
  • Dora Popović
  • Gerhard M. Prinz
  • Josip Razum
  • Ivaylo Sakelariev
  • Vivian Samuels
  • Inés Sanguino
  • Nicolas Say
  • Jakob Schuck
  • Irem Soysal
  • Anna Louise Todsen
  • Markus R. Tünte
  • Milica Vdovic
  • Jáchym Vintr
  • Maja Vovko
  • Marek Albert Vranka
  • Lisa Wagner
  • Lauren Wilkins
  • Manou Willems
  • Elizabeth Wisdom
  • Aleksandra Yosifova
  • Sandy Zeng
  • Mahmoud A. Ahmed
  • Twinkle Dwarkanath
  • Mina Cikara
  • Jeffrey Martin Lees
  • Tomas Folke
A pervading global narrative suggests that political polarisation is increasing in the US and around the world. Beliefs in increased polarisation impact individual and group behaviours regardless of whether they are accurate or not. One driver of polarisation are beliefs about how members of the out-group perceive us, known as group meta-perceptions. A 2020 study by Lees and Cikara in US samples suggests that not only are out-group meta-perceptions highly inaccurate, but informing people of this inaccuracy reduces negative beliefs about the out-group. Given the importance of these findings for understanding and mitigating polarisation, it is essential to test to what extent they generalise to other countries. We assess that generalisability by replicating two of the original experimentsin 10,207 participants from 26 countries in the first experiment and 10 in the second. We do this by studying local group divisions, which we refer to as fault lines. In line with our hypotheses, results show that the pattern found in the US broadly generalises, with greater heterogeneity explained by specific policies rather than between-country differences. The replication of a simple disclosure intervention in the second experiment yielded a modest reduction in negative motive attributions to the out-group, similar to the original study. These findings indicate first that inaccurate and negative group meta-perceptions are exhibited in a large number of countries, not only the US, and that informing individuals of their misperceptions can yield positive benefits for intergroup relations. The generalisability of these findings highlights a robust phenomenon with major implications for political discourse worldwide
Original languageEnglish
PublisherOSF-PREPRINTS
Pages1-25
Number of pages25
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 8 Sep 2020
Externally publishedYes

ID: 305700405