Group members enforce extreme attitudes by punishing those with balanced views

Evidence

For example, pluralistic ignorance, the faulty perception of a high level of agreement among ingroup members (e.g., family and friends), may increase conformity (Prentice & Miller, 1993). Further, research by Abrams, Rutland, Cameron, and Marques (2003) exposed group processes whereby ingroup members uphold extreme ingroup– outgroup attitudes by derogating those with balanced attitudes. This derogation is particularly strong among children in middle childhood, when conformity increases, and among group members who do not yet have a positive consensual identity. — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 2019

Categorization

• SEED: Possible essay angle: balanced, moderate views are socially punished precisely in identity-forming groups, so moderation is not merely unpersuasive but actively costly — a mechanism for self-reinforcing polarization.
• XREF: connects to: Expellee organizations enforced an orthodox policy line by punishing political deviation — Pertti Ahonen, Domestic Constraints on West German…, 105; Community leaders publicly excuse internal aggression to preserve a unified front — Manuel Borutta and Jan C. Jansen, Vertriebene and Pieds-Noirs in Postwar…, 659; Deliberation among like-minded peers pushes groups to more extreme positions. — Sander van der Linden, Foolproof: Why Misinformation Infects…, 437