How in-person conversations shape political polarization: quasi-experimental evidence from a nationwide initiative
Growing political polarization is often attributed to “echo chambers” among likeminded individuals and a lack of social interactions among contrary-minded individuals. We provide quasi-experimental evidence on the effects of in-person conversations on individual-level polarization outcomes, studying...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Elsevier
2025
|
| Summary: | Growing political polarization is often attributed to “echo chambers” among likeminded individuals and a lack of social interactions among contrary-minded individuals.
We provide quasi-experimental evidence on the effects of in-person conversations on
individual-level polarization outcomes, studying a large-scale intervention in Germany
that matched pairs of strangers for private face-to-face meetings to discuss divisive political issues. We find asymmetric effects: conversations with like-minded individuals
caused political views to become more extreme (ideological polarization); by contrast,
conversations with contrary-minded individuals did not lead to a convergence of political views, but significantly reduced negative beliefs and attitudes toward ideological
out-group members (affective polarization), while also improving perceived social cohesion more generally. These effects of contrary-minded conversations seem to be driven
mostly by positive experiences of interpersonal contact. |
|---|