Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41356339›Full record

ArticleInternational review of social psychology2025

Political Polarization and Wellbeing: Investigating Potential Intrapersonal Harm From Affective Polarization.

Brandon McMurtrie, Anja Roemer, Michael Philipp, Ross Hebden, Matt Williams

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International review of social psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Brandon McMurtrieMassey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4713-4191
Anja RoemerMassey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4996-8197
Michael PhilippUniversity of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8203-8018
Ross HebdenMassey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0217-7796
Matt WilliamsMassey University, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0571-215X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Affective polarization-antipathy towards members of one's political out-group-may pose challenges to social cohesion and personal wellbeing. Prior studies have suggested that one's affective polarization may cause intrapersonal harm as well as interpersonal harm. It has been associated with reduced social support, increased stress, and worse physical health. This pre-registered study investigated the intrapersonal harm of affective polarization using a six-wave longitudinal survey (N = 470). Affective polarization, social support, perceived stress, and self-rated health were measured fortnightly for three months preceding the 2024 US presidential election. Random intercept cross-lagged panel models were employed to investigate the within-person effects of affective polarization on these indicators of wellbeing. Contrary to hypotheses, none of the hypothesized cross-lagged effects were significant, suggesting that changes in affective polarization did not predict changes in social support, stress, or health. However, cross-sectional analyses did reflect past findings, showing that higher levels of affective polarization were associated with lower social support, greater stress, and worse health. We additionally found evidence for perceived stress causing moderate increases in affective polarization. Stable differences by political orientation were also observed in our sample, with liberals reporting higher affective polarization and stress, lower social support, and worse health. Despite the lack of significant effects, potentially due to limitations such as sample size and measurement constraints, our findings underscore the importance of further investigations with appropriate robust designs to clarify the relationship between affective polarization and wellbeing. These results challenge the assumption that affective polarization directly drives declines in wellbeing.

Indexed as

affective polarizationhealthpolitical polarizationsocial supportstress

Identifiers

PMID41356339
PMCPMC12679990

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.