The Phenomenon of Value-Affective Polarization of Large Social Groups and the Methodology for Assessing Implicit Political Attitudes

The phenomenon of value-affective polarization of large social groups has now become relevant in connection with global processes in the modern world and is one of the most important indicators of the psychological and political stability of society. To study this phenomenon in the field of political psychology, methods are needed that evaluate implicit (hidden or unconscious) political attitudes, since at present many citizens are not ready to publicly express their opinions on the most pressing issues of foreign and domestic policy. The article presents a methodology developed on the basis of the IAT (Implicit Association Test). According to the distribution of D-points calculated using the D2 method, it allows to evaluate political attitudes and makes it possible to experimentally study the value-affective polarization of opinions in focus group discussions without violating the principle of anonymity of respondents.

1. Lebedev A.N. Affekt neopredelennosti i tsennostno-affektivnaya polyarizatsiya bol'shikh sotsial'nykh grupp [Affect of uncertainty and value-affective polarization of large social groups]. Uchenye zapiski Instituta psikhologii Rossiiskoi akademii nauk [Proceedings of the Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences], 2023. Vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 3—17. DOI:10.38098/proceedigs_2023_03_01_02
2. Lebedev A.N. Gruppovaya polyarizatsiya mnenii v usloviyakh neopredelennosti moral'nogo vybora [Group polarization of opinions in conditions of uncertainty of moral choice]. Eksperimental'naya psikhologiya [Experimental psychology], 2022. Vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 159—171. DOI:10.17759/ exppsy.2022150212
3. Lebedev A.N. Fenomen tsennostno-affektivnoi polyarizatsii rossiiskogo obshchestva [The phenomenon of value-affective polarization of Russian society]. Uchenye zapiski Instituta psikhologii Rossiiskoi akademii nauk [Proceedings of the Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences], 2021. Vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 3—17.
4. Lebedev A.N., Gordyakova O.V. Fenomen gruppovoi polyarizatsii v politologii i politicheskoi psikhologii SShA i Evropy [The phenomenon of group polarization in political science and political psychology of the USA and Europe]. Institut psikhologii Rossiiskoi akademii nauk. Sotsial'naya i ekonomicheskaya psikhologiya [Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Social and economic psychology], 2021. Vol. 6, no. 4(24), pp. 123—150. DOI:10.38098/ipran.sep_2021_24_4_06
5. Podd'yakov A.N. Dopustimo li solgat' zloumyshlenniku, chtoby pomeshat' prestupleniyu: analiz istoricheskoi polemiki [Is it permissible to lie to an attacker in order to prevent a crime: analysis of historical polemics]. Kul'turno-istoricheskaya psikhologiya [Cultural and historical psychology], 2011. Vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 28—41.
6. Sapronov A.V. Sotsial'naya polyarizatsiya kak kharakteristika sovremennogo rossiiskogo obshchestva [Social polarization as a characteristic of modern Russian society]. Seriya: Ekonomika. Sotsiologiya. Menedzhment [News of the Southern State University. Series: Economics. Sociology. Management], 2012. No. 2, pp. 305—309.
7. Sapronov A.V., Kritskaya O.A. Osobennosti sotsial'noi polyarizatsii Rossiiskogo obshchestva [Features of social polarization of Russian society]. Vestnik Nizhegorodskogo Universiteta im. N.I. Labachevskogo. Seriya: Sotsial'nye nauki [Bulletin of the Nizhny Novgorod University named after N.I. Labachevsky. Series: Social Sciences], 2013. Pp. 82—86.
8. Abramowitz A.I., Saunders K.L. Is polarization a myth? Journal of Politics, 2008. Vol. 70(2), pp. 542—555. DOI:10.1017/S0022381608080493
9. Amodio D.M., Jost J.T., Master S.L., Yee C.M. Neurocognitive correlates of liberalism and conservatism. Nature Neuroscience, Vol. 10, pp. 1246—1247. DOI:10.1038/nn1979
10. Back M.D., Schmukle S.C., Egloff B. Measuring task-switching ability in the Implicit Association Test. Experimental Psychology, Vol. 52, pp. 167—179. DOI:10.1027/1618-3169.52.3.167
11. Bluemke M., Friese M. Do features of stimuli IAT effects? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2006. Vol. 42, pp. 163—176. DOI:10.1016/j.jesp.2005.03.004
12. Bluemke M., Friese M. Reliability and validity of the Single-Target IAT (ST-IAT): Assessing automatic affect towards multiple attitude objects. European Journal of Social Psychology, 2008. Vol. 38, pp. 977—997. DOI:10.1002/ejsp.487
13. Boxell L., Gentzkow M., Shapiro J.M. Cross-Country Trends in Affective Polarization. NBER Working Paper, 2020. w26669. URL: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3522318 (Accessed 11.09.2021).
14. Cunningham W.A., Johnson M.K., Raye C.L., Gatenby J.C., Gore J.C., Banaji M.R. Separable neural components in the processing of Black and White faces. Psychological Science, Vol. 15, pp. 806—813.
15. Druckman J.N., Klar S., Krupnikov Y., Levendusky M., Ryan J.B. Affective polarization, local contexts and public opinion in America. Nature Human Behaviour, 2021. Vol. 5, pp. 28—38.
16. Druckman J.N., Peterson E., Slothuus R. How Elite Partisan Polarization Affects Public Opinion Formation. American Political Science Review, 2013. Vol. 107, no. 1, pp. 57—79.
17. Epifania O.M., Anselmi P., Robusto E. DscoreApp: A Shiny Web Application for the Computation of the Implicit Association Test D-Score. Frontiers in Psychology, 2020. Vol. 10.
18. Greenwald A.G., Banaji M.R. The implicit revolution: Reconceiving the relation between conscious and unconscious. The American Psychologist, 2017. Vol. 72, 861—871. DOI:10.1037/amp0000238
19. Greenwald A.G., Nosek B.A., Banaji M.R. Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2003. Vol. 85, 197—216. DOI:10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.197
20. Greenwald A.G., McGhee D.E., Schwartz J.L.K. Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The Implicit Association Test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1998. 74, pp. 1464—1480. DOI:10.1037/0022-3514.74.6.1464
21. Kam C.D., Simas E.N. Risk orientations and policy frames. The Journal of Politics, 2010. Vol. 72, no. 2, pp. 381—396. DOI:10.1017/S0022381609990806
22. Kanai R., Feilden T., Firth C., Rees G. Political Orientations Are Correlated with Brain Structure in Young Adults. Current biology, Vol. 21, pp. 677—680.
23. Lane K.A., Banaji M.R., Nosek B.A., Greenwald A.G. Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: IV. What we know (so far). In B. Wittenbring and N. Schwarz (eds.). Implicit Measures of Attitudes. New York: Guilford, Pp. 59—102.
24. Miller R.G. Simultaneous Statistical Inference. Springer, 1966.
25. Monteith M.J., Ashburn-Nardo L., Voils C.I., Czopp A.M. Putting the brakes on prejudice: On the development and operation of cues for control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2002. Vol. 83, pp. 1029—1050.
26. Monteith M.J., Voils C.I., Ashburn-Nardo L. Taking a look under- ground: Detecting, interpreting, and reacting to implicit racial biases. Social Cognition, 2001. Vol. 19, pp. 395—417.
27. Moscovici S., Zavalloni M. The group as a polarizer of attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1969. Vol. 12, 2, pp. 125—135.
28. Nevryuev A., Gagarina M. After the discussion, I am even more confident in my point of view: An overview of studies of group polarization. Review of Business and Economics Studies, 2020. Vol. 8, 3, pp. 6—12.
29. Oxley D.R., Smith K.B., Alford J.R., Hibbing M.V., Miller J.L., Scalora M., Hatemi P.K., Hibbing J.R. Political attitudes vary with physiological traits. Science, Vol. 321, pp. 1667—1670.
30. Penke L., Eichstaedt J., Asendorpf J.B. Single-Attribute Implicit Association Tests (SA-IAT) for the assessment of unipolar constructs: The case of sociosexuality. Experimental Psychology, 2006. Vol. 53, pp. 283—291. DOI:10.1027/1618-3169.53.4.283
31. Poehlman A., Uhlmann E., Greenwald A.G., Banaji M.R. Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test III: A meta-analysis of predictive validity. Unpublished manuscript, 2005.
32. Rogowski J.C. Voter Decision-Making with Polarized Choices. British Journal of Political Science, 2018. Vol. 48, 1, pp. 1—22.
33. Rudman L.A. Implicit measures for social and personality psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2011.
34. Schnabel K., Asendorpf J.B., Greenwald A.G. Using Implicit Association Tests for the Assessment of Implicit Personality Self-Concept. In SAGE Handbook of Personality Theory and Assessment: Volume 2-Personality Measurement and Testing, 2008. Pp. 508—528. DOI:10.4135/9781849200479.n24
35. Schreiber D., Fonzo G., Simmons A.N., Dawes C.T., Flagan T., Fowler J.H., Paulus M. Red Brain, Blue Brain: Evaluative Processes Differ in Democrats and Republicans. PLoS ONE, Vol. 8, no. 2. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0052970
36. Stoet G. PsyToolkit: A Novel Web-Based Method for Running Online Questionnaires and Reaction-Time Experiments. Teaching of Psychology, Vol. 44, pp. 24—31.
37. Truex R., Tavana D.L. Implicit Attitudes toward an Authoritarian Regime. The Journal of Politics, Vol. 81, pp. 1014—1027.
38. Van S., Lyn M. Extreme members and group polarization. Social Influence, 2009. 4(3), pp. 185—199.
39. Wagner M., Russo L. Affective Polarization Around the World: Measurement, Causes and Consequences. 2021. URL: https://ecpr.eu/Events/Event/PanelDetails/10463 (Accessed 25.09.2023).