ArticleThe British journal of social psychology2025
How the manner in which data is visualized affects and corrects (mis)perceptions of political polarization.
Article in The British journal of social psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- How the manner in which data is visualized affects and corrects (mis)perceptions of political polarization.The British journal of social psychology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While the mechanisms underlying polarization are complex, scholars have consistently found a pervasive overestimation of perceptions of polarization to be a contributing factor. We argue that one mitigation strategy that can work at scale to address such misperceptions might be relatively straightforward: better data visualizations of cross-party attitudes on key issues. In a large-scale (N = 6603), international replication, we find that mode of presentation-or the manner in which data are visually presented-plays a significant role in moderating perceptions of polarization, even for longstanding, divisive issues for which partisans would likely hold strong prior beliefs. Additionally, we find the effects that different modes of presentation have on issue-specific polarization also extend to participant beliefs about overall interparty polarization, with certain modes proving capable of not only promoting less polarized views but also enabling more accurate estimates of the extent to which political groups agree. Finally, our findings also suggest that the manner in which intergroup data are visualized may also exert influence over the degree to which political groups are essentialized-a finding with implications for not only political perception but also for apolitical social psychological phenomena such as dehumanization.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.