idw – Informationsdienst Wissenschaft
Nachrichten, Termine, Experten
Nachrichten, Termine, Experten
Are opinions on controversial political issues as divided as many people perceive them to be? Researchers from the Leibniz Centre for Tropical Marine Research (ZMT) in Bremen, the Complexity Science Hub (CSH) in Vienna and the University of California Merced have addressed this question in a new social science study. The results have now been published in PNAS Nexus.
Many people think that society is becoming increasingly divided into opposing factions, giving the impression that ideological divides are deepening, for example on important issues such as public health, immigration, or climate change. Against this backdrop, past scientific studies have attempted to quantify the degree to which opinions actually diverge – often with contradictory results. In their new study, Peter Steiglechner (ZMT, now at CSH), Agostino Merico (ZMT) and Paul E. Smaldino (University of California Merced) explored how robust and realistic the widespread perception of polarisation is.
“When we think about contested political issues, we often have the impression that people within our inner social circles – family, friends, or political in-groups – hold relatively aligned and often even converging opinions. However, we sometimes also perceive that society overall is polarising. This uncomfortable perception may actually not always be entirely true,” says first author Peter Steiglechner.
+++ New method for disentangling perceived from actual polarisation +++
While past empirical works on societal polarisation focused on objective measures of opinion divergence, in this new study, the authors introduce a way to disentangle actual and subjectively perceived polarisation in empirical opinion data.
To explain the mathematics underpinning the method in an intuitive way, the authors introduce the metaphor of a political “lens” – a hypothetical device, or point of view, through which individuals evaluate a set of opinions. This subjective “lens” reflects the spread of opinions within a person’s inner circle.
“The broader the spread of these opinions on a given topic, the ’thicker’ the lens and the less divergent the broader society is perceived with respect to that topic,” explains Steiglechner. “The narrower the spread in one’s inner circle, i.e., the ‘thinner’ the lens, the more polarised the broader society is perceived.”
+++ Consensus within one’s circle can exaggerate perceptions of polarisation +++
Subjective, political lenses change over time and this dynamic crucially influences how a person perceives polarisation. The results show that perceived polarisation can even depend just as much on the dynamics of disagreement within identity groups (and thus on the lens) as on the actual divergence of opinion in the broader society.
“In other words, the more my inner circle agrees on matters such as climate change, the more I might feel a sense of polarisation at a broader societal scale on this topic, and vice versa.”, says Agostino Merico, co-author of the study. As this dynamic varies between political groups, the polarisation these groups perceive can also deviate greatly. “Ultimately, people don't even have to agree so much on how divided they are or on which issues they do or do not diverge,” concludes Peter Steiglechner.
+++ Ideological polarisation – more than a perceived experience +++
The study offers a new perspective on assessing and measuring the extent of polarisation, say the authors. “In times when increased polarisation goes hand in hand with disruptive social or political trends such as the decline in social cohesion or the rise of authoritarianism, it is important to understand the social and psychological mechanisms underlying these phenomena”, emphasises Paul Smaldino, the other co-author of the study.
Peter Steiglechner concludes: “Societal polarisation – or the perception of it – influences policymaking on challenges such as climate change, food crises or environmental protection and potentially impairs the search for consensus and the implementation of solutions in a democratic way. Our study shows that a change in perception is critical for reducing polarisation.”
--------------------------------------
The study was funded by the German Research Foundation as part of the priority programme "Sea Level and Society".
Dr. Peter Steiglechner | Postdoctoral Researcher
Complexity Science Hub, Vienna, Austria
Email: steiglechner@csh.ac.at
Prof. Dr. Agostino Merico | Head of Systems Ecology Group
Leibniz Centre for Tropical Marine Research (ZMT), Bremen, Germany
Email: agostino.merico@leibniz-zmt.de
P. Steiglechner, P.E. Smaldino, A. Merico (2025) How opinion variation among in-groups can skew perceptions of ideological polarization, PNAS Nexus, Volume 4, Issue 7, July 2025, pgaf184, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgaf184
Merkmale dieser Pressemitteilung:
Journalisten, Wissenschaftler
Gesellschaft
überregional
Forschungsergebnisse, Wissenschaftliche Publikationen
Englisch
Sie können Suchbegriffe mit und, oder und / oder nicht verknüpfen, z. B. Philo nicht logie.
Verknüpfungen können Sie mit Klammern voneinander trennen, z. B. (Philo nicht logie) oder (Psycho und logie).
Zusammenhängende Worte werden als Wortgruppe gesucht, wenn Sie sie in Anführungsstriche setzen, z. B. „Bundesrepublik Deutschland“.
Die Erweiterte Suche können Sie auch nutzen, ohne Suchbegriffe einzugeben. Sie orientiert sich dann an den Kriterien, die Sie ausgewählt haben (z. B. nach dem Land oder dem Sachgebiet).
Haben Sie in einer Kategorie kein Kriterium ausgewählt, wird die gesamte Kategorie durchsucht (z.B. alle Sachgebiete oder alle Länder).
