Neutrality Kills: Implications and Ideological Profiles of Ambivalence and Indifference Toward the Palestine-Israel “Conflict” in the 2024 U.S. Presidential Election

Using the 2024 ANES Time Series Study (N = 5,203), the present research investigated the political attitudes and behaviors, and the ideological profiles of U.S. people who took neutral stances on the Palestine-Israel “conflict.” Americans who held ambivalent (i.e., sided with both Israelis and Palestinians) and indifferent (i.e., sided with neither party) stances demonstrated policy-related attitudes in ways that did not align with the Palestinian cause, and were more comparable to pro-Israeli than to pro-Palestinian participants. Ambivalent and indifferent people were less likely to vote for pro-Palestinian presidential candidates (Cornel West or Jill Stein) and more likely to vote for Trump, compared with pro-Palestinian participants. Finally, we reveal the ideological profiles of ambivalent and indifferent people based on egalitarianism, moral traditionalism, racial resentment, and nationalism. These findings advance the psychology of neutrality in the context of systemic oppression.

Authors

Publication Details

Published
2025-09-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/m76vp_v1
Primary Topic
Jewish and Middle Eastern Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Neutrality Kills: Implications and Ideological Profiles of Ambivalence and Indifference Toward the Palestine-Israel “Conflict” in the 2024 U.S. Presidential Election

Apoorva Sarmal, Minh Duc Pham
Jewish and Middle Eastern Studies
article

Neutrality Kills: Implications and Ideological Profiles of Ambivalence and Indifference Toward the Palestine-Israel “Conflict” in the 2024 U.S. Presidential Election

Apoorva Sarmal, Minh Duc Pham
article en

Abstract

Using the 2024 ANES Time Series Study (N = 5,203), the present research investigated the political attitudes and behaviors, and the ideological profiles of U.S. people who took neutral stances on the Palestine-Israel “conflict.” Americans who held ambivalent (i.e., sided with both Israelis and Palestinians) and indifferent (i.e., sided with neither party) stances demonstrated policy-related attitudes in ways that did not align with the Palestinian cause, and were more comparable to pro-Israeli than to pro-Palestinian participants. Ambivalent and indifferent people were less likely to vote for pro-Palestinian presidential candidates (Cornel West or Jill Stein) and more likely to vote for Trump, compared with pro-Palestinian participants. Finally, we reveal the ideological profiles of ambivalent and indifferent people based on egalitarianism, moral traditionalism, racial resentment, and nationalism. These findings advance the psychology of neutrality in the context of systemic oppression.

Openalex Percentile: Top 65%
Jewish and Middle Eastern Studies
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.

Neutrality Kills: Implications and Ideological Profiles of Ambivalence and Indifference Toward the Palestine-Israel “Conflict” in the 2024 U.S. Presidential Election — Apoorva Sarmal, Minh Duc Pham · (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS