Social Psychological Perspectives on Political Polarization: Insights and Implications for Climate Change
- PMID: 37722136
- PMCID: PMC11720282
- DOI: 10.1177/17456916231186409
Social Psychological Perspectives on Political Polarization: Insights and Implications for Climate Change
Abstract
Political polarization is a barrier to enacting policy solutions to global issues. Social psychology has a rich history of studying polarization, and there is an important opportunity to define and refine its contributions to the present political realities. We do so in the context of one of the most pressing modern issues: climate change. We synthesize the literature on political polarization and its applications to climate change, and we propose lines of further research and intervention design. We focus on polarization in the United States, examining other countries when literature was available. The polarization literature emphasizes two types of mechanisms of political polarization: (1) individual-level psychological processes related to political ideology and (2) group-level psychological processes related to partisan identification. Interventions that address group-level processes can be more effective than those that address individual-level processes. Accordingly, we emphasize the promise of interventions leveraging superordinate identities, correcting misperceived norms, and having trusted leaders communicate about climate change. Behavioral interventions like these that are grounded in scientific research are one of our most promising tools to achieve the behavioral wedge that we need to address climate change and to make progress on other policy issues.
Keywords: affective polarization; climate change; interventions; political polarization; social identities; social norms.
Conflict of interest statement
The author(s) declared that there were no conflicts of interest with respect to the authorship or the publication of this article.
Similar articles
-
Social Climate Science: A New Vista for Psychological Science.Perspect Psychol Sci. 2016 Sep;11(5):632-650. doi: 10.1177/1745691616639726. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2016. PMID: 27694459 Review.
-
Psychological Barriers to Bipartisan Public Support for Climate Policy.Perspect Psychol Sci. 2018 Jul;13(4):492-507. doi: 10.1177/1745691617748966. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2018. PMID: 29961412
-
Perceiving political polarization in the United States: party identity strength and attitude extremity exacerbate the perceived partisan divide.Perspect Psychol Sci. 2015 Mar;10(2):145-58. doi: 10.1177/1745691615569849. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2015. PMID: 25910386
-
The differential impact of climate interventions along the political divide in 60 countries.Nat Commun. 2024 May 8;15(1):3885. doi: 10.1038/s41467-024-48112-8. Nat Commun. 2024. PMID: 38719845 Free PMC article.
-
Scaling Up Change: A Critical Review and Practical Guide to Harnessing Social Norms for Climate Action.Psychol Sci Public Interest. 2022 Oct;23(2):50-97. doi: 10.1177/15291006221105279. Psychol Sci Public Interest. 2022. PMID: 36227765 Review.
Cited by
-
Most Christian American religious leaders silently believe in climate change, and informing their congregation can help open dialogue.Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2025 Apr;122(13):e2419705122. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2419705122. Epub 2025 Mar 25. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2025. PMID: 40131947
-
Younger Americans are less politically polarized than older Americans about climate policies (but not about other policy domains).PLoS One. 2024 May 15;19(5):e0302434. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0302434. eCollection 2024. PLoS One. 2024. PMID: 38748690 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Abramowitz A. I., Saunders K. L. (2006). Exploring the bases of partisanship in the American electorate: Social identity vs. ideology. Political Research Quarterly, 59(2), 175–187. 10.1177/106591290605900201 - DOI
-
- Abrams D., Wetherell M., Cochrane S., Hogg M. A., Turner J. C. (1990). Knowing what to think by knowing who you are: Self-categorization and the nature of norm formation, conformity and group polarization. British Journal of Social Psychology, 29(2), 97–119. 10.1111/J.2044-8309.1990.TB00892.X - DOI - PubMed
-
- Achen C. H., Bartels L. M. (2019). Democracy for realists. Princeton University Press. 10.2307/j.ctvc7770q - DOI
-
- Ajzen I., Madden T. J. (1986). Prediction of goal-directed behavior: Attitudes, intentions, and perceived behavioral control. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22(5), 453–474. 10.1016/0022-1031(86)90045-4 - DOI
-
- Aklin M., Urpelainen J. (2013). Debating clean energy: Frames, counter frames, and audiences. Global Environmental Change, 23(5), 1225–1232. 10.1016/J.GLOENVCHA.2013.03.007 - DOI
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical