Updating amidst Disagreement: New Experimental Evidence on Partisan Cues

In this era of hyper-polarization and partisan animosity, do people incorporate the viewpoints of their political opponents? Perhaps not. An important body of research, in fact, finds that the provision of information about opponents' policy views leads survey respondents to reflexively adopt the opposite position. In this paper, we demonstrate that such findings arise from incomplete experimental designs and a particular measurement strategy. In a series of experiments that vary information about both parties' positions simultaneously and that solicit continuous, rather than discrete, policy positions, we find that partisans update their beliefs in accordance with the positions of Republican and Democratic leaders alike. Partisans are not perennially determined to disagree. Rather, they are often willing to incorporate opposing viewpoints about a wide range of policy issues.

Automated summary

In this era of hyper-polarization and partisan animosity, people may not incorporate the viewpoints of their political opponents. However, research shows that incomplete experimental designs and specific measurement strategies have led to findings suggesting the reflexive adoption of opposite positions when presented with information about opponents' policy views. In a series of experiments, updating beliefs in accordance with both Republican and Democratic leaders' positions was observed, indicating that partisans are not perpetually determined to disagree and are often willing to incorporate opposing viewpoints on various policy issues.