IDEOPOL

Ideological polarization, defined as the extremization and the subsequent widening of divides regarding sociopolitical attitudes and beliefs, is increasing between different social groups (e.g., Republicans vs. Democrats, women vs. men). Although ideological polarization has some benefits (e.g., voter consistency), it can also be a danger when it prevents groups and societies from reaching collective decisions that are as fair and accurate as possible. Ideological polarization is currently considered to result from social identification. However, we argue that not all forms of identification (i.e., defensive and secure) lead to ideological polarization. In IDEOPOL, we will unravel the role of defensive and secure forms of social identification on ideological polarization and the underlying ingroup and intraindividual processes. Across three work packages (WPs), we will examine the relationships between defensive and secure forms of social identification and ideological polarization among gender and political partisan groups. We will also consider two levels of processes that are or could be at work in ideological polarization. First, WP1 (using a longitudinal method) and WP2 (with in situ observations) will investigate intragroup processes aimed at reducing divergence of opinion within the group. Then, WP3 (using an eye-tracking method) will focus on intraindividual processes of motivated reasoning in the selection and processing of information. Overall, IDEOPOL revisits and extends the existing literature on ideological polarization by adding the core distinction between defensive and secure forms of identification and by using relevant but underused ecological methods.