By Phillip McGarry
Both Republicans and Democrats regarded people with opposing political views as less moral than people in their own party, even when their political opposites acted fairly or kindly toward them, according to experiments my colleagues and I recently conducted. Even participants who self-identified as only moderately conservative or liberal made the same harsh moral judgments about those on the other side of the political divide.
Psychology researcher Eli Finkel and his colleagues have suggested that moral judgment plays a major role in political polarization in the United States. My research team wondered if acts demonstrating good moral character could counteract partisan animosity. In other words, would you think more highly of someone who treated you well – regardless of their political leanings?
We decided to conduct an experiment based on game theory and turned to the Ultimatum Game, which researchers developed to study the role of fairness in cooperation. Psychology researcher Hanah Chapman and her colleagues have demonstrated that unfairness in the Ultimatum Game elicits moral disgust, making it a good tool for us to use to study moral judgment in real time.
The Ultimatum Game allowed us to experimentally manipulate whether partisans were treated unfairly, fairly or even kindly by political opponents. Participants had no knowledge about the person they were playing with beyond party affiliation and how they played the game.
In our experiments, even after fair or kind treatment, participants still rated political opponents as less moral. Moreover, this was true even for participants who didn’t consider themselves to have strong political bias.
Other psychology studies suggest that conservatives are more politically extreme, being more likely to adopt right-wing authoritarianism and more sensitive to moral disgust. However, in our experiments, we found no differences in party animosity and moral judgment between liberals and conservatives, suggesting political polarization is a bipartisan phenomenon.
Why it matters
Our experiments illustrate the magnitude of current political polarization in the United States, which has been increasing for at least the last four decades.
Americans with different political opinions could once cooperate and maintain friendships with one another. But as political attitudes begin to coincide with moral convictions, partisans increasingly view each other as immoral.
My colleagues and I are particularly interested in this topic, as we worry about the potential for political polarization based on moral convictions to descend into political violence.
What’s next
My colleagues and I believe that a controlled scientific approach, rather than speculation, could help find ways to mitigate political polarization. Currently, we are running experiments to explore how online interaction – for example, through social media – can foster psychological distance between partisans. We’re also investigating how emotions such as disgust can contribute to the moral component of partisan animosity, and how the evolutionary origins of morality may play a psychological role in political polarization.
Phillip McGarry is a doctoral Candidate in Experimental Psychology at the University of Tennessee.
Angry Millenial says
I believe this more a function of gerontocracy (along with its narcissistic geriatric voter base) having a stranglehold on our political system, rather than a partisan issue.
I’ll await the angry comments.
Angry Millenial says
I dream of the day when our country implements a blockchain voting system. How could this work? It’s really quite simple, and we have the technology to implement this. Each person is given a unique identifier (similar to a Social Security Number). This becomes your “voter ID.“ Rather than allowing politicians to vote on our behalf (which they never really do), key issues are placed on the blockchain (an online public ledger) before the country for vote. This would truly democratize America, ensuring everyone’s vote counts. The purpose is to reach a majority, which decides the outcome. Government wants to go to war with another country? Put it to a vote on the blockchain. Government wants to send our tax dollars to a foreign nation? Let the people decide. Such a system would almost certainly eliminate voter fraud. It would eliminate the dysfunctional two party system. It would save tax payers billions of dollars and increase government productivity and efficiency and eliminate reckless fiscal spending. It creates a new system of checks and balances. Control is returned to the people. It would give everyone the opportunity to be more proactive in our political system. Voting can take place from a computer or smartphone, eliminating long lines at polling stations. We can even vote on the frequency of voting, monthly, yearly, whatever we decide. Results can be tallied nearly instantaneously. No more hand counting ballots. No more lying politicians. No more rigged elections. No more pay to play system controlled by lobbyists. I wonder why none of our politicians have proposed such an idea? Guess it wouldn’t serve their interests. Power to the people!
Pogo says
@FlaglerLive
Today is Valentine’s Day — not April Fools’.
FWIW:
As stated
https://www.google.com/search?q=direct+democracy
As stated
https://www.google.com/search?q=utopia
As stated
https://www.google.com/search?q=dystopia
As stated
https://www.google.com/search?q=blockchain
As stated
https://www.google.com/search?q=the+answer+is+42
Endless Dark Money says
rcons will sabotage any program or legislation their donors dont like. Dems tried to have financial disclosure of campaign funds shot down by Rs, Majority vote wins not on R’s watch. voting a national holiday not with any support from the R’s. So good luck changing anything when they have a stranglehold on everything and just deny science truth and facts if it does suit their whims.
Michael J Cocchiola says
Yeah, but the big difference is that extremist Trump-Republicans are, in fact, immoral.
oldtimer says
And what would keep someone from hacking the system?
Jackson says
Republicans can’t govern so they engage in political theater. It’s all they have.
Republicans never cared for the US Constitution.
BusyLivinNotBusyDyin says
I am not a card carrying member of the Democrats or Republicans. When it comes down to it I do not care what party you are a devoted follower of, I do not care who you vote for. Vote for whatever candidates you want to vote for and I will meet you for a beer later.
Angry Millenial – blockchain voting could be a reality, but I would not expect it anytime in the near future. People fight having a voter ID for some unknown reason.
Oldtimer – like any tech out there, it would need to be fortified with the best means possible. Would it get hacked? I am sure are those that would try and possibly have success.
Last 3 comments before this – you played right into the polarization point of this article. Well done!
Sherry says
Right On, Michael!
We Democrats are considered immoral because we, what.? . . let’s see:
1. Believe in “equal” justice under the law, regardless of skin color or wealth
2. Believe that “everyone”, even the wealthy, should pay their fair in taxes
3. Believe in “Scientific Fact”
4. Believe in the “common good”
5. Believe in the constitution
6. Believe that we should be good stewards of our shared environment
7. Believe that “character” matters
8. Believe in honesty, honor, ethics and integrity
9. Believe in the “Golden Rule”
10. Understand that we share this planet with others and our lives are interconnected
My, my, my . . . we Democrats are a bunch of angry immoral $%^&* aren’t we?
Deborah Coffey says
A good list! We could add: Believe in compromise.
Sherry says
busyliving. . . so, we are not allowed to defend ourselves? You are welcome!
Sherry says
Right On Deborah! And, I should have included “Equal Opportunity and Education”, regardless of skin color or wealth.
Laurel says
Busy: For some, it’s difficult to get a picture ID because they were born without a birth certificate. That pertains mostly to older, African American folks. Today, that’s rare.
Other than that, I believe a person, who has a drivers license can get an official state ID without a picture. I had one once, but I don’t know if it’s still done. The DMV used to do it.