ArticlePNAS nexus2024
Descriptive norms can "backfire" in hyper-polarized contexts.
Article in PNAS nexus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Defusing political animosity in the United States with a cooperative online quiz game.Nature human behaviour · 2025Article
- How out-group animosity can shape partisan divisions: A model of affective polarization.PNAS nexus · 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
Descriptive social norms interventions, where a behavior is promoted by learning that others engage in that behavior, are a cornerstone of behavior change research and practice. Here, we examine the effect of learning about the behavior of outgroup members in a hyper-polarized context: mask-wearing during the COVID-19 pandemic. Contrary to prior findings, we find a descriptive social norm "backfire": Across three experiments, Biden supporters increased their mask-wearing intentions after being informed that most Trump supporters never wore masks. We also provide evidence consistent with a mechanism whereby this effect was driven by changes in perceptions about how negatively ingroup members view nonmask wearing. Finally, in a fourth study, Biden supporters show the traditional descriptive norms effect (rather than a backfire) from the same treatment when in a nonpolarized context: dishonesty in a coin-flipping task. These findings help to clarify why descriptive social norm interventions promote behavior change, and underscore the importance of social norms in motivating prosocial behaviors. They also suggest an update to current best practices in the design of descriptive norm interventions: in polarized contexts, it can be beneficial to publicize antisocial behavior of outgroup members.
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.