IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/pubeco/v234y2024ics0047272724000586.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Preempting polarization: An experiment on opinion formation

Author

Listed:
  • Kashner, Daniel
  • Stalinski, Mateusz

Abstract

Blind adoption of opinions put forward by political parties and influential figures can sometimes be harmful. Focusing on cases where the partisan gap on policy support has not yet arisen, we investigate whether its formation can be prevented by encouraging prior active engagement with non-partisan information. To address this question, we recruited N=851 Republicans for a study about net neutrality, an issue largely unfamiliar to the electorate, which refers to equal treatment of all internet traffic. In a pre-registered experiment, we randomly changed the order in which the following two types of information were provided: (i) partisan, underscoring Republicans’ opposition and Democrats’ support, and (ii) non-partisan, where the participants evaluated factual arguments about the pros and cons of the policy. Despite holding total information constant, we find that those who saw the non-partisan block first donated 46% more to a charity advocating for net neutrality (p=0.001). The treatment effect persisted in an obfuscated follow-up study, conducted several weeks after the intervention. However, we do not find an effect on donations when repeating the main study with a sample of Democrats.

Suggested Citation

  • Kashner, Daniel & Stalinski, Mateusz, 2024. "Preempting polarization: An experiment on opinion formation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:pubeco:v:234:y:2024:i:c:s0047272724000586
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2024.105122
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272724000586
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2024.105122?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Haugtvedt, Curtis P & Wegener, Duane T, 1994. "Message Order Effects in Persuasion: An Attitude Strength Perspective," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 21(1), pages 205-218, June.
    2. Bechtel, Michael M. & Hainmueller, Jens & Hangartner, Dominik & Helbling, Marc, 2015. "Reality Bites: The Limits of Framing Effects for Salient and Contested Policy Issues," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(3), pages 683-695, September.
    3. Shane P Singh & Meili Swanson, 2017. "How issue frames shape beliefs about the importance of climate change policy across ideological and partisan groups," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(7), pages 1-14, July.
    4. Rafael Di Tella & Ricardo Perez-Truglia & Andres Babino & Mariano Sigman, 2015. "Conveniently Upset: Avoiding Altruism by Distorting Beliefs about Others' Altruism," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(11), pages 3416-3442, November.
    5. Dan M. Kahan & Ellen Peters & Maggie Wittlin & Paul Slovic & Lisa Larrimore Ouellette & Donald Braman & Gregory Mandel, 2012. "The polarizing impact of science literacy and numeracy on perceived climate change risks," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 2(10), pages 732-735, October.
    6. Martin Bisgaard, 2019. "How Getting the Facts Right Can Fuel Partisan‐Motivated Reasoning," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 63(4), pages 824-839, October.
    7. Peter Schwardmann & Egon Tripodi & Joël J. van der Weele, 2022. "Self-Persuasion: Evidence from Field Experiments at International Debating Competitions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(4), pages 1118-1146, April.
    8. Ron Shachar, 2003. "Party loyalty as habit formation," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(3), pages 251-269.
    9. David S. Lee, 2009. "Training, Wages, and Sample Selection: Estimating Sharp Bounds on Treatment Effects," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 76(3), pages 1071-1102.
    10. Alberto Cavallo & Guillermo Cruces & Ricardo Perez-Truglia, 2017. "Inflation Expectations, Learning, and Supermarket Prices: Evidence from Survey Experiments," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 9(3), pages 1-35, July.
    11. Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2023. "Designing Information Provision Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 3-40, March.
    12. Michael Thaler, 2021. "The Supply of Motivated Beliefs," Papers 2111.06062, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2023.
    13. Babcock, Linda, et al, 1995. "Biased Judgments of Fairness in Bargaining," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(5), pages 1337-1343, December.
    14. Druckman, James N. & Peterson, Erik & Slothuus, Rune, 2013. "How Elite Partisan Polarization Affects Public Opinion Formation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 107(1), pages 57-79, February.
    15. Haaland, Ingar & Roth, Christopher, 2020. "Labor market concerns and support for immigration," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    16. Hassan Afrouzi & Carolina Arteaga & Emily Weisburst, 2024. "Is It the Message or the Messenger? Examining Movement in Immigration Beliefs," Journal of Political Economy Microeconomics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 2(2), pages 244-297.
    17. Ebonya Washington & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2009. "Sticking with Your Vote: Cognitive Dissonance and Political Attitudes," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 1(1), pages 86-111, January.
    18. John J. Conlon & Malavika Mani & Gautam Rao & Matthew W. Ridley & Frank Schilbach, 2022. "Not Learning from Others," NBER Working Papers 30378, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Roland Bénabou & Jean Tirole, 2011. "Identity, Morals, and Taboos: Beliefs as Assets," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 126(2), pages 805-855.
    20. Lind, Thérèse & Erlandsson, Arvid & Västfjäll, Daniel & Tinghög, Gustav, 2022. "Motivated reasoning when assessing the effects of refugee intake," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(2), pages 213-236, April.
    21. Jesper Akesson & Robert W. Hahn & Robert D. Metcalfe & Itzhak Rasooly, 2022. "Race and Redistribution in the United States: An Experimental Analysis," NBER Working Papers 30426, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    22. Chen, Jaden Yang, 2022. "Biased learning under ambiguous information," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    23. Armin Falk & Florian Zimmermann, 2018. "Information Processing and Commitment," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 128(613), pages 1983-2002, August.
    24. Dede Long & Hongxing Liu & Rodolfo M. Nayga Jr., 2023. "Polarization in Environmental Donations: Application to Deforestation-Prevention Donation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 99(1), pages 122-140.
    25. Anton Gollwitzer & Cameron Martel & William J. Brady & Philip Pärnamets & Isaac G. Freedman & Eric D. Knowles & Jay J. Van Bavel, 2020. "Partisan differences in physical distancing are linked to health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 4(11), pages 1186-1197, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gneezy, Uri & Saccardo, Silvia & Serra-Garcia, Marta & van Veldhuizen, Roel, 2020. "Bribing the Self," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 120, pages 311-324.
    2. Lergetporer, Philipp & Woessmann, Ludger, 2023. "Earnings information and public preferences for university tuition: Evidence from representative experiments," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 226(C).
    3. Mechtenberg, Lydia & Perino, Grischa & Treich, Nicolas & Tyran, Jean-Robert & Wang, Stephanie W., 2024. "Self-signaling in voting," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 231(C).
    4. Dietmar Fehr & Johanna Mollerstrom & Ricardo Perez-Truglia, 2022. "Your Place in the World: Relative Income and Global Inequality," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 14(4), pages 232-268, November.
    5. Elisabeth Grewenig & Philipp Lergetporer & Katharina Werner, 2020. "Gender Norms and Labor-Supply Expectations: Experimental Evidence from Adolescents," CESifo Working Paper Series 8611, CESifo.
    6. Grigorieff, Alexis & Roth, Christopher & Ubfal, Diego, 2016. "Does Information Change Attitudes Towards Immigrants? Representative Evidence from Survey Experiments," IZA Discussion Papers 10419, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Mellacher, Patrick, 2023. "The impact of corona populism: Empirical evidence from Austria and theory," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 209(C), pages 113-140.
    8. Zhuoqiong (Charlie) Chen & Tobias Gesche, 2016. "Persistent bias in advice-giving," ECON - Working Papers 228, Department of Economics - University of Zurich, revised Oct 2017.
    9. Silvia Saccardo & Marta Serra-Garcia, 2020. "Cognitive Flexibility or Moral Commitment? Evidence of Anticipated Belief Distortion," CESifo Working Paper Series 8529, CESifo.
    10. Elisa Stumpf & Silke Uebelmesser, 2024. "Lifting the Veil of Ignorance – Survey Experiments on Preferences for Wealth Redistribution," CESifo Working Paper Series 11126, CESifo.
    11. Grigorieff, Alexis & Roth, Christopher & Ubfal, Diego, 2016. "Does Information Change Attitudes Towards Immigrants? Representative Evidence from Survey Experiments," IZA Discussion Papers 10419, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Felix Chopras & Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth, 2024. "The Demand for News: Accuracy Concerns Versus Belief Confirmation Motives," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 134(661), pages 1806-1834.
    13. Schnorpfeil, Philip & Weber, Michael & Hackethal, Andreas, 2023. "Households' response to the wealth effects of inflation," SAFE Working Paper Series 400, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
    14. Cattaneo, Cristina & Grieco, Daniela, 2021. "Turning opposition into support to immigration: The role of narratives," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 785-801.
    15. Lasse J. Jessen & Sebastian Koehne & Patrick Nüß & Jens Ruhose, 2024. "Socioeconomic Inequality in Life Expectancy: Perception and Policy Demand," CESifo Working Paper Series 10940, CESifo.
    16. Lergetporer, Philipp & Piopiunik, Marc & Simon, Lisa, 2021. "Does the education level of refugees affect natives’ attitudes?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    17. Felix Chopra & Ingar K. Haaland & Christopher Roth, 2019. "Do People Value More Informative News?," CESifo Working Paper Series 8026, CESifo.
    18. Link, Sebastian & Peichl, Andreas & Roth, Christopher & Wohlfart, Johannes, 2023. "Information frictions among firms and households," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 99-115.
    19. Jesper Akesson & Sam Ashworth-Hayes & Robert Hahn & Robert Metcalfe & Itzhak Rasooly, 2022. "Fatalism, beliefs, and behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 64(2), pages 147-190, April.
    20. Katharina Momsen & Sebastian O. Schneider, 2022. "Motivated Reasoning, Information Avoidance, and Default Bias," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2022_03, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Political polarization; Opinion formation; Partisan identity;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making
    • P16 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Capitalist Economies - - - Capitalist Institutions; Welfare State
    • Z18 - Other Special Topics - - Cultural Economics - - - Public Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:pubeco:v:234:y:2024:i:c:s0047272724000586. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505578 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.