In October 2020, two opposing candidates vying for office in Utah broke with convention and collaborated on a television advertisement. Governor Spencer Cox, the incumbent Republican, and his Democratic rival, Chris Peterson, shared a platform to highlight their shared commitment to fundamental American values: liberty, democracy, and justice for all.
While such reassurances are uncommon, a recent study co-authored by MIT reveals a significant discrepancy in how much U.S. citizens believe their political opponents seek to undermine democracy, offering both unfavorable and promising implications.
Self-fulfilling
One unsettling consequence of the research is that citizens who believe their political adversaries are intent on curtailing democracy may find themselves justifying the erosion of democratic norms within their own ranks.
Alex “Sandy” Pentland, an MIT professor and co-author of the study, warns that this pattern can lead to a perilous decline for democracy. The study, based on surveys and experiments involving thousands of Americans, emphasizes the influence of false claims made by former President Donald Trump and others regarding the 2020 election, as well as misleading news reports on alleged election misconduct.
These factors have contributed to the prevalence of such beliefs among Republicans. Simultaneously, Democratic Party leaders publicly emphasize the threat posed by Republican-backed measures to the democratic system.
Not all bleak
On a more positive note, the study reveals that supporters of both major parties generally express their commitment to democracy to a greater extent than their rivals perceive, indicating a potential receptiveness to the notion that their political opponents also value democratic principles.
The joint advertisement by the Utah candidates serves as an example of this approach. Pentland asserts that when people become aware of the extent to which voters on both sides uphold democracy, it significantly reduces the intensity of toxic polarization and can even alter individuals’ voting preferences.
Understanding that opposing groups share a commitment to democracy may be crucial for maintaining a robust democratic system. As a result, Pentland suggests that reducing fear between partisan groups could strengthen democratic institutions.
Subvert Democratic Norms
To conduct the study, the researchers administered an online survey followed by two experiments using the Lucid and Mechanical Turk platforms. The survey involved a representative sample of 1,973 U.S. citizens and asked them to estimate their political opponents’ willingness to undermine democratic norms and their own willingness to do the same in response to seven types of non-democratic actions.
The actions included measures like restricting polling stations and banning rallies. The study found that the overall results were similar for both major parties. Democrats estimated that Republicans would be willing to subvert an average of 5.0 democratic norms while they themselves would be willing to subvert 1.5 norms. Republicans estimated that Democrats would be willing to subvert an average of 5.2 norms while they themselves would be willing to subvert 1.2 norms.
The study also revealed that individuals who believed their opponents were more inclined to subvert democratic practices were themselves more willing to abandon those norms. The scholars suggest that this tendency is exacerbated by unfounded claims made by leaders like Trump.
Willingness to Abandon Democratic Practices
They note that people have often overlooked the significance of frequent claims by potential authoritarians that their opponents are breaking democratic rules. This perception leads their supporters, in this case Republicans, to tolerate the erosion of democratic norms by politicians like Trump. Rather than viewing Trump as undermining democracy, they see him as leveling a playing field they perceive as already biased against them.
However, the research also demonstrates that people are open to valid information demonstrating their opponents’ commitment to upholding democratic practices. In one experiment involving 2,545 U.S. citizens, the researchers divided respondents into treatment and control groups after querying them about their perceptions of norm-breaking.
The treatment group received fact-based feedback aligning their perceptions with reality. Participants who received fact-based feedback rated their political opponents’ willingness to subvert democratic norms at 0.40 on a scale of 0 to 1, while those who received no factual feedback rated their opponents’ intent at 0.64.
Building Confidence and Trust
Those in the treatment group displayed less willingness to break democratic norms themselves and were also less likely to vote for candidates who supported the subversion of norms in hypothetical election scenarios.
In another online experiment involving 1,973 U.S. citizens, the researchers altered the format of the previous experiment to reduce the predictability of follow-up questions. The results were largely similar, but the scholars observed that participants from both Republican and Democratic backgrounds who reported higher levels of ethnic antagonism were more likely to support subverting democratic norms.
Overall, the results from these follow-on experiments indicate that providing individuals with better information about their political opponents helps build confidence and trust. When Democrats witness that many Republicans value democracy, and vice versa, there is a potential for breaking the downward spiral that the United States currently faces.
Resolving toxic polarization
The study highlights the significance of these findings in an era where many people are seeking solutions to toxic polarization. The authors assert that individuals become more willing to uphold democracy when they fear their counterparts less. They suggest that countering narratives targeting Republicans to demonstrate that Democrats genuinely uphold democracy, as indicated by the research, can make Republicans more inclined to hold their representatives accountable.
However, the challenge lies in implementing such approaches on a large scale. While the joint advertisement by the Utah candidates in 2020 was likely effective, reaching a vast number of citizens can be challenging.
The researchers, along with their counterparts across the United States, acknowledge the need to continue studying which methods prove most effective in fostering bipartisan support for democracy. Braley affirms that the next step is to take these findings and test the most effective mechanisms for reducing mutual fears between partisans in real-world contexts.
