How opinion variation among in-groups can skew perceptions of ideological polarization

There is a widespread perception that society has been polarizing into groups with increasingly divergent opinions. Multiple studies have sought to quantify the degree of opinion divergence (or ideological polarization), typically relying on differences between self-reported opinions, and have reached mixed conclusions. We propose this inconsistency can be explained by the way individuals' subjective perceptions are shaped by their social identities. We introduce a formal framework to analyze opinion data that accounts for such asymmetric, dynamic perceptions. When members of an in-group become increasingly homogeneous on a given topic (i.e. when the variance of opinions in that group decreases), they perceive deviant opinions as increasingly distant from their own. Consequently, these individuals may perceive greater polarization than an objective, neutral observer would. Applying the framework to data on the opinions of Germans about climate change, we show that perceived polarization may depend as much on the dynamics of in-group variance as it does on actual opinion divergence in society. Moreover, we show that the direction of this effect may vary over time and across different partisan groups. Our framework offers an explanation why people might sometimes perceive higher levels of ideological polarization than surveys indicate, independent of social segregation, polarization-enforcing cognitive biases, or affect-driven attitudes towards out-groups.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
PNAS Nexus
Published
2025-06-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgaf184
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Social Media and Politics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.86

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

How opinion variation among in-groups can skew perceptions of ideological polarization

Paul E. Smaldino, Agostino Merico, Peter Steiglechner
1 citations
PNAS Nexus
Social Media and Politics
3.86
article

How opinion variation among in-groups can skew perceptions of ideological polarization

Paul E. Smaldino, Agostino Merico, Peter Steiglechner
article en
1 citations

Abstract

There is a widespread perception that society has been polarizing into groups with increasingly divergent opinions. Multiple studies have sought to quantify the degree of opinion divergence (or ideological polarization), typically relying on differences between self-reported opinions, and have reached mixed conclusions. We propose this inconsistency can be explained by the way individuals' subjective perceptions are shaped by their social identities. We introduce a formal framework to analyze opinion data that accounts for such asymmetric, dynamic perceptions. When members of an in-group become increasingly homogeneous on a given topic (i.e. when the variance of opinions in that group decreases), they perceive deviant opinions as increasingly distant from their own. Consequently, these individuals may perceive greater polarization than an objective, neutral observer would. Applying the framework to data on the opinions of Germans about climate change, we show that perceived polarization may depend as much on the dynamics of in-group variance as it does on actual opinion divergence in society. Moreover, we show that the direction of this effect may vary over time and across different partisan groups. Our framework offers an explanation why people might sometimes perceive higher levels of ideological polarization than surveys indicate, independent of social segregation, polarization-enforcing cognitive biases, or affect-driven attitudes towards out-groups.

PNAS NexusVol. 4(7)
Santa Fe Institute (US), University of California, Merced (US), Constructor University (DE), Leibniz Centre for Tropical Marine Research (DE), Complexity Science Hub (AT)
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Social Media and Politics
3.86
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

How opinion variation among in-groups can skew perceptions of ideological polarization — Paul E. Smaldino, Agostino Merico, et al. · PNAS Nexus (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS