Lees Jeffrey, Cikara Mina, Druckman James N
Andlinger Center for Energy and the Environment, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08540, USA.
Department of Human Resource Management and Organizational Behavior, University of Groningen, 9747 AE Groningen, The Netherlands.
PNAS Nexus. 2024 Oct 15;3(10):pgae324. doi: 10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae324. eCollection 2024 Oct.
Partisans hold inaccurate perceptions of the other side. What drives these inaccuracies? We address this question with a focus on partisan animosity meta-perceptions (i.e. how much a partisan believes opposing partisans hate them). We argue that predictors can relate to meta-perceptions statically (e.g. at a specific point in time, do partisans who post more about politics on social media differ in their meta-perceptions relative to partisans who post less?) or dynamically (e.g. does a partisan who increases their social media political posting between two defined time points change their meta-perceptions accordingly?). Using panel data from the 2020 US presidential election, we find variables display distinct static and dynamic relationships with meta-perceptions. Notably, between individuals, posting online exhibits no (static) relationship with meta-perceptions, while within individuals, those who increased their postings over time (dynamically) became more accurate. The results make clear that overly general statements about meta-perceptions and their predictors, including social media activity, are bound to be wrong. How meta-perceptions relate to other factors often depends on contextual circumstances at a given time.
党派人士对另一方持有不准确的认知。是什么导致了这些不准确的认知呢?我们聚焦于党派敌意元认知(即一名党派人士认为对立党派人士有多讨厌他们)来探讨这个问题。我们认为,预测因素可以与元认知存在静态关联(例如在某个特定时间点,在社交媒体上发布更多政治内容的党派人士与发布较少的党派人士相比,他们的元认知是否存在差异?),也可以存在动态关联(例如在两个确定的时间点之间增加社交媒体政治发文的党派人士是否会相应地改变他们的元认知?)。利用2020年美国总统大选的面板数据,我们发现变量与元认知呈现出不同的静态和动态关系。值得注意的是,在个体之间,在线发文与元认知没有(静态)关联,而在个体内部,随着时间推移增加发文量(动态)的人会变得认知更准确。结果表明,关于元认知及其预测因素(包括社交媒体活动)的过于笼统的说法必然是错误的。元认知与其他因素的关系通常取决于特定时间的背景情况。