New Delhi: Political moderates often seek a middle ground on contentious issues, rejecting extreme views from both the Left and the Right. But this may have made them enemies on both sides of the political spectrum, according to a new study by the American Psychological Association.
The research, published in the Journal of Experimental Psychology: General on 27 July, suggests that while moderates are receptive to opposing views, partisans still see them as aiding the other side.
The study, titled ‘Whoever Is Not With Me Is Against Me: The “Moderate as Out-Group” Effect’, involved five online experiments in which 3,272 people in the US were asked about their views on political issues such as the Israel-Palestine conflict, abortion, and the 2024 US presidential election.
In one of the five experiments, conducted just days before the 2024 US election, respondents were asked what they felt about a hypothetical person who supported both Donald Trump and Kamala Harris in the polls. They were also asked if the opposing candidate’s victory posed a threat to them, someone they know, or society. Those who felt a threat, saw the hypothetical person as an aid to the opposing side.
“Democratic systems rely heavily on compromise, negotiation and coalition building, and moderates are often seen as the ‘glue’ that helps bridge ideological divides,” said lead researcher Giulia Maimone, a postdoctoral scholar in marketing at the University of Florida. “If moderates are rejected by both sides, compromise itself may begin to look suspicious or disloyal.”
Also read: Why this Rs 47 govt face wash is India’s most talked-about skincare product
The ‘moderate as out-group’ effect
In another experiment, the participants were presented with a moderate policy that allowed abortions in the first trimester of pregnancy. Researchers observed that both supporters and opponents of abortion saw the policy as supporting the opposite side.
Researchers call this the “moderate as out-group” effect.
“We find that the ‘moderate as out-group’ effect occurs when sociopolitical issues are moralized and, at the same time, the opposing side is perceived to be a threat to oneself, close ones, or society at large,” the researchers said.
“’Moderate as out-group’ effect occurs when the moderate view is framed as proboth sides, but it is attenuated when it is framed as pro-neither side,” they added.
Maimone said that categorising moderates as members of the opposing camp can increase polarisation as they might feel rejected by both sides and eventually pick one.
“Reducing the moralized language around some political debates and not demonizing political opponents so they would seem less threatening could help make political cooperation feel more socially acceptable,” she said.