» Articles » PMID: 34851979

When Election Expectations Fail: Polarized Perceptions of Election Legitimacy Increase with Accumulating Evidence of Election Outcomes and with Polarized Media

Overview
Journal PLoS One
Date 2021 Dec 1
PMID 34851979
Citations 4
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The present study, conducted immediately after the 2020 presidential election in the United States, examined whether Democrats' and Republicans' polarized assessments of election legitimacy increased over time. In a naturalistic survey experiment, people (N = 1,236) were randomly surveyed either during the week following Election Day, with votes cast but the outcome unknown, or during the following week, after President Joseph Biden was widely declared the winner. The design unconfounded the election outcome announcement from the vote itself, allowing more precise testing of predictions derived from cognitive dissonance theory. As predicted, perceived election legitimacy increased among Democrats, from the first to the second week following Election Day, as their expected Biden win was confirmed, whereas perceived election legitimacy decreased among Republicans as their expected President Trump win was disconfirmed. From the first to the second week following Election Day, Republicans reported stronger negative emotions and weaker positive emotions while Democrats reported stronger positive emotions and weaker negative emotions. The polarized perceptions of election legitimacy were correlated with the tendencies to trust and consume polarized media. Consumption of Fox News was associated with lowered perceptions of election legitimacy over time whereas consumption of other outlets was associated with higher perceptions of election legitimacy over time. Discussion centers on the role of the media in the experience of cognitive dissonance and the implications of polarized perceptions of election legitimacy for psychology, political science, and the future of democratic society.

Citing Articles

Ideological diversity of media consumption predicts COVID-19 vaccination.

Grant M, Markowitz D, Sherman D, Flores A, Dickert S, Eom K Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):28948.

PMID: 39578487 PMC: 11584658. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-77408-4.


Suspicious Minds: Unexpected Election Outcomes, Perceived Electoral Integrity and Satisfaction With Democracy in American Presidential Elections.

Mongrain P Polit Res Q. 2023; 76(4):1589-1603.

PMID: 37916035 PMC: 10615620. DOI: 10.1177/10659129231166679.


A belief systems analysis of fraud beliefs following the 2020 US election.

Botvinik-Nezer R, Jones M, Wager T Nat Hum Behav. 2023; 7(7):1106-1119.

PMID: 37037989 DOI: 10.1038/s41562-023-01570-4.


Structured reflection increases intentions to reduce other people's health risks during COVID-19.

Ramos J, Grant M, Dickert S, Eom K, Flores A, Jiga-Boy G PNAS Nexus. 2023; 1(5):pgac218.

PMID: 36712345 PMC: 9802473. DOI: 10.1093/pnasnexus/pgac218.

References
1.
Simon D, Stenstrom D, Read S . The coherence effect: Blending cold and hot cognitions. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2015; 109(3):369-94. DOI: 10.1037/pspa0000029. View

2.
Van Bavel J, Pereira A . The Partisan Brain: An Identity-Based Model of Political Belief. Trends Cogn Sci. 2018; 22(3):213-224. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2018.01.004. View

3.
Van Boven L, Ehret P, Sherman D . Psychological Barriers to Bipartisan Public Support for Climate Policy. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2018; 13(4):492-507. DOI: 10.1177/1745691617748966. View

4.
Finkel E, Bail C, Cikara M, Ditto P, Iyengar S, Klar S . Political sectarianism in America. Science. 2020; 370(6516):533-536. DOI: 10.1126/science.abe1715. View