气候变化领域集成服务门户(CCPortal): The objectivity illusion and voter polarization in the 2016 presidential election

CCPortal

DOI	10.1073/pnas.1912301117
	The objectivity illusion and voter polarization in the 2016 presidential election
	Schwalbe M.C.; Cohen G.L.; Ross L.D.
发表日期	2020
ISSN	0027-8424
起始页码	21218
结束页码	21229
卷号	117 期号:35
英文摘要	Two studies conducted during the 2016 presidential campaign examined the dynamics of the objectivity illusion, the belief that the views of “my side” are objective while the views of the opposing side are the product of bias. In the first, a three-stage longitudinal study spanning the presidential debates, supporters of the two candidates exhibited a large and generally symmetrical tendency to rate supporters of the candidate they personally favored as more influenced by appropriate (i.e., “normative”) considerations, and less influenced by various sources of bias than supporters of the opposing candidate. This study broke new ground by demonstrating that the degree to which partisans displayed the objectivity illusion predicted subsequent bias in their perception of debate performance and polarization in their political attitudes over time, as well as closed-mindedness and antipathy toward political adversaries. These associations, furthermore, remained significant even after controlling for baseline levels of partisanship. A second study conducted 2 d before the election showed similar perceptions of objectivity versus bias in ratings of blog authors favoring the candidate participants personally supported or opposed. These ratings were again associated with polarization and, additionally, with the willingness to characterize supporters of the opposing candidate as evil and likely to commit acts of terrorism. At a time of particular political division and distrust in America, these findings point to the exacerbating role played by the illusion of objectivity. © 2020 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
英文关键词	Cognitive bias; Intergroup conflict; Polarization; Political psychology
语种	英语
scopus关键词	Article; cognitive bias; conflict; controlled study; election; female; human; human experiment; male; objectivity illusion; political polarization; politics; priority journal; psychology; United States; adult; attitude; illusion; longitudinal study; middle aged; motivation; perception; social behavior; Adult; Attitude; Female; Goals; Humans; Illusions; Longitudinal Studies; Male; Middle Aged; Politics; Social Behavior; Social Perception
来源期刊	Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
文献类型	期刊论文
条目标识符	http://gcip.llas.ac.cn/handle/2XKMVOVA/160831
作者单位	Schwalbe, M.C., Department of Psychology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-2130, United States; Cohen, G.L., Department of Psychology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-2130, United States; Ross, L.D., Department of Psychology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-2130, United States
推荐引用方式 GB/T 7714	Schwalbe M.C.,Cohen G.L.,Ross L.D.. The objectivity illusion and voter polarization in the 2016 presidential election[J],2020,117(35).
APA	Schwalbe M.C.,Cohen G.L.,&Ross L.D..(2020).The objectivity illusion and voter polarization in the 2016 presidential election.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America,117(35).
MLA	Schwalbe M.C.,et al."The objectivity illusion and voter polarization in the 2016 presidential election".Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 117.35(2020).