Skip to main content

Lund University Publications

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

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

Renström, Emma A. LU ; Bäck, Hanna LU orcid and Carroll, Royce (2022) In Frontiers in Political Science 4.
Abstract

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... (More)

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.

(Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
; and
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
affective polarization, authoritarianism, immigration attitudes, survey, Sweden
in
Frontiers in Political Science
volume
4
article number
919236
publisher
Frontiers Media S. A.
external identifiers
  • scopus:85135075105
ISSN
2673-3145
DOI
10.3389/fpos.2022.919236
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
9ffaead4-9c3c-4147-8c39-6447e87fc33a
date added to LUP
2022-09-09 15:46:49
date last changed
2024-02-16 07:50:27
@article{9ffaead4-9c3c-4147-8c39-6447e87fc33a,
  abstract     = {{<p>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.</p>}},
  author       = {{Renström, Emma A. and Bäck, Hanna and Carroll, Royce}},
  issn         = {{2673-3145}},
  keywords     = {{affective polarization; authoritarianism; immigration attitudes; survey; Sweden}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  publisher    = {{Frontiers Media S. A.}},
  series       = {{Frontiers in Political Science}},
  title        = {{Protecting the Ingroup? Authoritarianism, Immigration Attitudes, and Affective Polarization}},
  url          = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2022.919236}},
  doi          = {{10.3389/fpos.2022.919236}},
  volume       = {{4}},
  year         = {{2022}},
}