The Consequences of Affective Polarization: A Survey Experiment in 9 Countries

Much of the concern about affective polarization (that is, antipathy between supporters of opposing political camps) among commentators and academics alike stems from its alleged nefarious consequences for democracy and society. Affective polarization is often expected to reduce the cohesion of societies, erode tolerance and democratic norms among its citizens, limit the accountability of its leaders, and ultimately even pave the way to violence. We identify two knowledge gaps in the literature, which we aim to address in this study. First, the evidence regarding these downstream consequences of affective polarization is almost completely restricted to the United States. Secondly, most studies tend to be correlational, whereas other designs are need to firmly establish whether such nefarious consequences are actual consequences of (rather than just correlates of) affective polarization. In our pre-registered study, we collected data on affective polarization and its downstream political and nonpolitical consequences among ~2,000 respondents each in 9 countries: Brazil, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States. We are among the first to bring the study of the alleged consequences of affective polarization – which in our study includes social avoidance, political intolerance, support for political violence, support for elite transgression, the erosion of democratic norms, democratic dissatisfaction, and politicized factual perceptions – to contexts outside the Anglosphere. To increase causal leverage, we exposed part of our respondents to a stimulus that either exogenously heightens or weakens negative affect towards political outgroups. As a result, we can observe whether, among whom, and through which mechanisms affective polarization results in more severe consequences for society and democracy. By conducting this study, we aim to contribute to a better understanding of the extent of escalated polarization around the world – and, by extension, of the question how worrying a phenomenon affective polarization really is. In addition to unique empirical evidence from nine societies on different continents, we provide a theoretical framework integrating these possible downstream effects in a comparative perspective. Through these contributions, we hope to further the discussion on possible remedies against (excessive) polarization around the world.