At Least Bias Is Bipartisan: A Meta-Analytic Comparison of Partisan Bias in Liberals and Conservatives

被引:277
作者
Ditto, Peter H. [1 ]
Liu, Brittany S. [2 ]
Clark, Cory J. [3 ]
Wojcik, Sean P. [1 ]
Chen, Eric E. [1 ]
Grady, Rebecca H. [1 ]
Celniker, Jared B. [1 ]
Zinger, Joanne F. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calif Irvine, Dept Psychol & Social Behav, 4201 Social & Behav Sci Gateway, Irvine, CA 92697 USA
[2] Kalamazoo Coll, Dept Psychol, Kalamazoo, MI 49007 USA
[3] Florida State Univ, Dept Psychol, Tallahassee, FL 32306 USA
关键词
bias; motivated reasoning; ideology; politics; meta-analysis; POLITICAL ORIENTATION; MOTIVATED SKEPTICISM; ATTITUDE IMPORTANCE; SELF-ENHANCEMENT; NEGATIVITY BIAS; ELITE INFLUENCE; PUBLIC-OPINION; POLICY; PARTY; ATTRIBUTION;
D O I
10.1177/1745691617746796
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Both liberals and conservatives accuse their political opponents of partisan bias, but is there empirical evidence that one side of the political aisle is indeed more biased than the other? To address this question, we meta-analyzed the results of 51 experimental studies, involving over 18,000 participants, that examined one form of partisan bias-the tendency to evaluate otherwise identical information more favorably when it supports one's political beliefs or allegiances than when it challenges those beliefs or allegiances. Two hypotheses based on previous literature were tested: an asymmetry hypothesis (predicting greater partisan bias in conservatives than in liberals) and a symmetry hypothesis (predicting equal levels of partisan bias in liberals and conservatives). Mean overall partisan bias was robust (r = .245), and there was strong support for the symmetry hypothesis: Liberals (r = .235) and conservatives (r = .255) showed no difference in mean levels of bias across studies. Moderator analyses reveal this pattern to be consistent across a number of different methodological variations and political topics. Implications of the current findings for the ongoing ideological symmetry debate and the role of partisan bias in scientific discourse and political conflict are discussed.
引用
收藏
页码:273 / 291
页数:19
相关论文
共 130 条
  • [61] Ideological Asymmetries and the Essence of Political Psychology
    Jost, John T.
    [J]. POLITICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2017, 38 (02) : 167 - 208
  • [62] Political conservatism as motivated social cognition
    Jost, JT
    Glaser, J
    Kruglanski, AW
    Sulloway, FJ
    [J]. PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN, 2003, 129 (03) : 339 - 375
  • [63] Kahan D. M., 2017, BEHAV PUBLIC POLICY, V1, P54, DOI [DOI 10.1017/BPP.2016.2, 10.1017/bpp.2016.2]
  • [64] Culturally antagonistic memes and the Zika virus: an experimental test
    Kahan, Dan M.
    Jamieson, Kathleen Hall
    Landrum, Asheley
    Winneg, Kenneth
    [J]. JOURNAL OF RISK RESEARCH, 2017, 20 (01) : 1 - 40
  • [65] Kahan DM, 2016, U PENN LAW REV, V164, P349
  • [66] Kahan DM, 2013, JUDGM DECIS MAK, V8, P407
  • [67] The polarizing impact of science literacy and numeracy on perceived climate change risks
    Kahan, Dan M.
    Peters, Ellen
    Wittlin, Maggie
    Slovic, Paul
    Ouellette, Lisa Larrimore
    Braman, Donald
    Mandel, Gregory
    [J]. NATURE CLIMATE CHANGE, 2012, 2 (10) : 732 - 735
  • [68] Kahan DM, 2012, STANFORD LAW REV, V64, P851
  • [69] Cultural cognition of scientific consensus
    Kahan, Dan M.
    Jenkins-Smith, Hank
    Braman, Donald
    [J]. JOURNAL OF RISK RESEARCH, 2011, 14 (02) : 147 - 174
  • [70] Kahan DM., 2016, Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences, P1, DOI DOI 10.1002/9781118900772.ETRDS0417