FIND DATA: By Journal | Sites   ANALYZE DATA: Help with R | SPSS | Stata | Excel   WHAT'S NEW? US Politics | IR | Law & Courts🎵
   FIND DATA: By Journal | Sites   WHAT'S NEW? US Politics | IR | Law & Courts🎵
WHAT'S NEW? US Politics | IR | Law & Courts🎵
If this link is broken, please
You can also
(will be reviewed).

Calling It 'Politics' Drives Away the Conflict-Averse

conflict aversionsurvey participationPolitical Behavior@APSR1 Stata file13 DatasetsDataverse
Political Behavior subfield banner

📌 What This Research Shows

People who are averse to conflict tend to opt out when surveys or conversations are explicitly labeled 'political.' That selection creates a skew: contexts labeled as political end up disproportionately populated by people willing to engage in conflict, so political surveys and discussions give an inflated impression of contentiousness.

🔍 Evidence From Eight Studies

  • Results come from eight studies that measured selection into surveys and discussions described as 'political.'
  • Across these studies, conflict-averse individuals were more likely to decline participation or avoid discussion when the context was explicitly labeled 'political.'

🛠️ What Framing Helps — and What Doesn't

  • Little evidence was found that emphasizing deliberative norms (e.g., asking for calm, reasoned discussion) reduces the selection effect.
  • Conflict-averse respondents nevertheless showed greater willingness to discuss specific topics—economy, climate change, and racial inequality—when those topics were not framed as 'politics.'
  • These respondents also reported more interest in politics when it was defined in terms of laws and policies and when debate or confrontation was deemphasized.

Key Takeaways

  • Labeling a context 'political' signals expected conflict and disproportionately attracts conflict seekers.
  • The expected conflict therefore has a self-fulfilling effect: explicitly 'political' settings are more conflictual because conflict-averse people remove themselves from those settings.
  • This selective participation implies that inferences from 'political' surveys and the impressions formed from explicitly political discussions will be systematically biased toward conflict.

💡 Why It Matters

These findings imply that how politics is labeled and framed shapes who participates and therefore how politics appears to the public and researchers. To get a more representative sense of public views and calmer exchanges, researchers and practitioners may need to rethink labels and frames that trigger conflict expectations.

Article card for article: Selecting out of "Politics": the Self-Fulfilling Role of Conflict Expectation
Selecting out of "Politics": the Self-Fulfilling Role of Conflict Expectation was authored by Eric Groenendyk, Yanna Krupnikov, John Barry Ryan and Elizabeth C. Connors. It was published by Cambridge in APSR in 2024.
Find on Google Scholar
Find on Cambridge University Press
American Political Science Review