Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41969568›Full record

ArticlePNAS nexus2026

Associations between inclusivity norms and tolerance, contact, and cooperation amid polarization: Evidence from 12 European countries.

Laura F Schäfer, Nicole Tausch, Marcin Bukowski, Eva Jaspers, Miranda J Lubbers, Maarten van Zalk, Alejandro Ciordia, Anna Potoczek, Lucía Estevan-Reina, Maor Shani and 14 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PNAS nexus, 2026. 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

24 authors.

Laura F SchäferFaculty of Psychology, FernUniversität in Hagen, 58097 Hagen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6617-4199
Nicole TauschSchool of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of St Andrews, St Andrews KY16 9AJ, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9471-0673
Marcin BukowskiInstitute of Psychology, Jagiellonian University, 30-348 Kraków, Poland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7130-4066
Eva JaspersDepartment of Sociology, Utrecht University, 3584 CH Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8589-5899
Miranda J LubbersDepartment of Social and Cultural Anthropology, Autonomous University of Barcelona, 08193 Bellaterra, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8398-6044
Maarten van ZalkDepartment of Psychology, University of Osnabrück, 49076 Osnabrück, Germany.
Alejandro CiordiaMaastricht Sustainability Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, 6211 ME, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6586-924X
Anna PotoczekInterdisciplinary Centre for Mathematical and Computational Modelling, University of Warsaw, 02106 Warszawa, Poland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3293-249X
Lucía Estevan-ReinaInstitute of Psychology, Jagiellonian University, 30-348 Kraków, Poland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4724-3969
Maor ShaniDepartment of Psychology, University of Osnabrück, 49076 Osnabrück, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5301-5332
Jan-Willem SimonsDepartment of Sociology, Utrecht University, 3584 CH Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3341-5320
Maria-Therese FriehsFaculty of Psychology, FernUniversität in Hagen, 58097 Hagen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5897-8226
Dominika GurbiszInstitute of Psychology, Jagiellonian University, 30-348 Kraków, Poland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9691-1524
Wilma MiddendorfDepartment of Psychology, University of Osnabrück, 49076 Osnabrück, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-1283-3084
Sarina J SchäferFaculty of Psychology, FernUniversität in Hagen, 58097 Hagen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1159-111X
Jil UllenboomFaculty of Psychology, FernUniversität in Hagen, 58097 Hagen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-1369-590X
Sylvie GrafInstitute of Psychology, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, 602 00 Brno, Czech Republic.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7810-5457
Mikael HjermDepartment of Sociology, Umeå University, 901 87 Umeå, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4203-5394
Chloé LavestDepartment of Sociology, Utrecht University, 3584 CH Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-2725-6193
Inga Jasinskaja-LahtiFaculty of Social Sciences, University of Helsinki, 00014 Helsinki, Finland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6419-5324
Anna KendeInstitute of Psychology, ELTE Eötvös Loránd University, 1064 Budapest, Hungary.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5148-0145
Katerina PetkanopoulouDepartment of Psychology, University of Crete, 74150 Rethymno, Greece.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0439-8987
Francesca PratiDepartment of Psychology, University of Bologna, 33 - 40126 Bologna, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3639-8631
Oliver ChristFaculty of Psychology, FernUniversität in Hagen, 58097 Hagen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4022-9278

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sharp disagreements about social issues have raised concerns about increasing societal polarization in democracies worldwide. While diversity of opinion is vital for democratic engagement and can promote innovative solutions, social science research shows that such disagreements can undermine social cohesion and erode social trust if they turn into identity-based conflicts. The present research examines the potential importance of social norms that promote equality-based respect, dialogue, and unity (inclusivity norms) in mitigating these negative outcomes. In a preregistered, large-scale survey of 12,041 individuals in 12 European countries, we find that perceived inclusivity norms are associated with increased tolerance, greater willingness to collaborate, and lower tendencies to avoid people who hold opposing opinions. In most countries studied, this pattern holds among respondents who strongly disapprove of the opposing viewpoint, endorse antipluralist opinions, hold anti-egalitarian preferences, and identify more strongly with their opinion-based group relative to society. These findings support the potential of inclusivity norms to preserve social trust and cohesion amid opinion diversity.

Indexed as

intergroup relationspolarizationsocial norms

Identifiers

PMID41969568
PMCPMC13069891

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.