Lee Spike W S, Ma Cecilia
Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto.
Department of Psychology, University of Toronto.
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2023 Dec;125(6):1239-1264. doi: 10.1037/pspa0000355. Epub 2023 Aug 24.
We live in a time of exacerbating political polarization. Bridging the ideological divide is hard. Although some strategies have been found effective for interpersonal persuasion and interaction across the aisle, little is known about what attributes predict which individuals are more inclined to support their ideological opponent's views. The present work identifies a low-level attribute-sensitivity to physical pain-that robustly predicts individual variations in support for moral and political views typically favored by one's ideological opponent. We first summarize a psychophysical validation of an established pain sensitivity measure ( = 263), then report a series of exploratory and preregistered confirmatory studies and replications ( = 7,360) finding that more (vs. less) pain-sensitive liberal Americans show greater endorsement of moral foundations typically endorsed by conservatives (Studies 1a-1c), higher likelihood of voting for Trump over Biden in the 2020 presidential election, stronger support for Republican politicians, and more conservative attitudes toward contentious political issues (Studies 2a and 2b). Conservatives show the mirroring pattern. These "cross-aisle" effects of pain sensitivity are driven by heightened harm perception (Study 3). They defy lay intuitions (Study 4). They are not attributable to multicollinearity or response set. The consistent findings across studies highlight the value of deriving integrative predictions from multiple previously unconnected perspectives (social properties of pain, moral foundations theory, dyadic morality theory, principle of multiple determinants in higher mental processes). They open up novel directions for theorizing and research on why pain sensitivity predicts support for moral and political views across the aisle. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
我们生活在一个政治两极分化日益加剧的时代。弥合意识形态分歧并非易事。尽管已经发现一些策略在跨党派的人际说服和互动中有效,但对于哪些属性能够预测哪些人更倾向于支持其意识形态对手的观点,我们却知之甚少。目前的研究确定了一种低层次属性——对身体疼痛的敏感性——它能有力地预测个体在支持通常受其意识形态对手青睐的道德和政治观点方面的差异。我们首先总结了一种既定疼痛敏感性测量方法的心理物理学验证(N = 263),然后报告了一系列探索性和预先注册的验证性研究及重复研究(N = 7360),发现疼痛敏感性较高(相对于较低)的美国自由派人士对保守派通常认可的道德基础表现出更大的认同(研究1a - 1c),在2020年总统选举中投票给特朗普而非拜登的可能性更高,对共和党政治家的支持更强,以及对有争议的政治问题持更保守的态度(研究2a和2b)。保守派呈现出相反的模式。疼痛敏感性的这些“跨党派”效应是由对伤害的感知增强所驱动的(研究3)。它们违背了外行的直觉(研究4)。它们并非归因于多重共线性或反应定势。各研究结果一致突出了从多个先前未关联的视角(疼痛的社会属性、道德基础理论、二元道德理论、高级心理过程中的多重决定因素原则)得出综合预测的价值。它们为关于疼痛敏感性为何能预测跨党派的道德和政治观点支持的理论化和研究开辟了新方向。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c)2023美国心理学会,保留所有权利)