Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39402238›Full record

ArticleCommunications psychology2024

A post-Brexit intergroup contact intervention reduces affective polarization between Leavers and Remainers short-term.

Nicole Tausch, Michèle D Birtel, Paulina Górska, Sidney Bode, Carolina Rocha

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Communications psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Nicole TauschUniversity of St Andrews, School of Psychology and Neuroscience, St Andrews, UK. nt20@st-andrews.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9471-0673
Michèle D BirtelUniversity of Greenwich, Institute for Lifecourse Development, School of Human Sciences, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2383-9197
Paulina GórskaUniversity of Warsaw, Faculty of Psychology, Warsaw, Poland.
Sidney BodeUniversity of St Andrews, School of Psychology and Neuroscience, St Andrews, UK.
Carolina RochaUniversity of Dundee, School of Business, Dundee, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With mounting evidence of the harmful societal consequences of affective polarization, it is crucial to find ways of addressing it. Employing a randomized controlled trial, this study tested the effectiveness of an intervention based on theories of intergroup contact and interpersonal communication in reducing affective polarization in the context of Brexit. Participants were 120 UK self-identified Leavers and Remainers. Sixty Leaver-Remainer dyads were randomized to engage in either a facilitated intergroup interaction or a control interaction, which was equivalent in structure and tone but was unrelated to Brexit identities. Different aspects of affective polarization were assessed one month prior, immediately after, and one month after the intervention. Results indicate that the intervention increased warmth toward the outgroup, reduced unfavourable attributions of the sources of outgroup positions, and increased willingness to compromise, but only short-term. There were no statistically significant longer-term effects of the intervention. Evidence of selective attrition further suggests that those with more extreme baseline opinions were more likely to drop out. Our findings highlight the challenges of designing effective interventions that engender enduring attitude change in polarized contexts and of engaging those with extreme political views. This study can provide a useful framework for future research.

Identifiers

PMID39402238
PMCPMC11473807

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.