Extreme justifications fuel polarisation

Clicks: 24
ID: 314756
2026
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #117 of 296 articles by views in the economic journal

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 296 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Abstract How does polarisation — as measured by mistreatment of political rivals — spread? In an online experiment, participants choose between splitting financial resources equally or discriminating against a supporter of the opposing political party. We vary the information subjects receive about others’ choices and justifications for discrimination. Exposure to extreme justifications for discrimination increases discrimination — particularly in a polarized environment, when many others are already discriminating — and it leads participants to adopt more extreme justifications themselves. Our findings suggest a self-reinforcing dynamic that may fuel polarisation: Exposure to extreme statements increases polarisation and the prevalence of extreme reasoning.
Reference Key
openalex_W7162186294 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors
Journal the economic journal
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/ej/ueag062
URL
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.