Perceived Threats and Horizontal Affective Polarization: A Comparative Study of Germany and Spain

Existing research on affective polarization often assumes that strong group identities are sufficient to trigger out-group dislike. However, insights from social psychology suggest that identity may only translate into hostility when individuals perceive out-groups as a threat. While the links between perceived threat and out-group prejudice have been extensively studied in social psychology, the relationship between different types of perceived threats and horizontal affective polarization (hostility directed towards out-party supporters) remains relatively under-explored in political science. Drawing on intergroup threat theory, this paper examines the relationship between symbolic threats (perceived threats to in-group values, norms, and worldviews), realistic threats (perceived threats to physical safety or material welfare) and negative affect towards out-party supporters. We hypothesize that while symbolic threats will be generally more strongly associated with affective polarization across all groups, realistic threats play a more prominent role for supporters of right-wing (and, especially far-right) parties, who the literature suggests may be more sensitive to safety and security-related concerns. To test these hypotheses, we utilize original survey data collected in Spain and Germany in 2024. By incorporating items that measure symbolic and realistic threat perceptions directed at both political and social out-groups, the study provides a comparative perspective on the micro-foundations of interpartisan hostility. The paper also contributes to the literature by demonstrating the critical role of perceived threat in fostering political divisions within contemporary European democracies.