Deliberation among like-minded peers pushes groups to more extreme positions.

Evidence

Classic research in psychology has revealed what happens when you put like-minded people together in a group to discuss a contested issue – a phenomenon sometimes referred to as the ‘law of group polarization’. For example, say we invite people who are pro-death penalty to discuss the issue with each other at length. We then invite another group of people with anti-death penalty attitudes to do the same in another room. Importantly, the groups do not mix, they remain in their own echo chambers. Many studies show that both groups typically emerge with more extreme positions on the topic than they had going into the experiment. In other words, following deliberation with like-minded peers, people become more convinced of their own arguments and polarize away from each other. — Sander van der Linden, Foolproof, 437

Categorization

• DEFINE: Defines the ‘law of group polarization’ with the canonical like-minded-deliberation experimental finding.
• QUESTION: The finding that deliberation among the already-likeminded produces extremism could connect to jury deliberation and deliberative-democracy critiques — worth chasing the boundary conditions.
• XREF: connects to: Discussing outgroup attitudes with like-minded people makes them more extreme; Discussion with likeminded peers pushes group attitudes further in their initial direction — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years…, 2369; Group members enforce extreme attitudes by punishing those with balanced views — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years…, 2019 (+5 more)

Broader Connections

• Discussion with likeminded peers pushes group attitudes further in their initial direction #corroborates (0.92) — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 2369
• Discussing outgroup attitudes with like-minded people makes them more extreme #corroborates (0.90)
• Discussing prejudiced views with likeminded peers intensifies rather than moderates them. #corroborates (0.90)
• Group members enforce extreme attitudes by punishing those with balanced views #expands (0.85) — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 2019
• Voting turnout rises when a person believes their participation correlates with like-minded peers #expands (0.75) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 2519
• Low cohesion or threat makes groups rigid against minority dissent #qualifies (0.72) — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 1412