Political polarization and bias during the COVID-19 pandemic — Penn Science Policy and Diplomacy Group

By Wisberty J. Gordián Vélez

This is our third post on the big idea of confirmation bias.

The United States is experiencing an unprecedented intermingling of crises: job losses not seen since World War II, a pandemic that has killed more than 500,000 Americans, and political division that led to an attack on the Capitol. These crises have heightened our understanding of the role of politics and policy in our lives, as reflected by the record levels of votes cast and turnout in the 2020 election. This historic engagement has been driven in part by political polarization, a phenomenon in which the beliefs of different groups regarding policy, ideology, and political institutions become increasingly oppositional. When driven to extremes, it can impair democracy and the implementation of policies that address society’s problems. Voters are now more likely to dislike the other side and see it as an existential threat to the country at levels exceeding differences in policy opinions. Political scientists have argued that polarization has been fomented by the nationalization of politics and by parties becoming more homogeneous and identifiable with specific policies, social views, race, religion, ideology, and identity. Policymakers also contribute with how they communicate and act in response to a polarized electorate to maintain their power. Every disagreement is a battle to the death between two sides, where cooperation is impossible and no victory is secure. This high-stakes feeling is reflected in the small margins and few districts or states that determine control of Congress and the presidency. As people retreat to their corners, the two parties are differentiated further and polarization is reinforced in a vicious cycle.

Partisan identity can influence how people perceive the world and therefore how they think and act. Polarized people reject evaluating their views, dismiss the opinions and policies of others, and exclude information that contradicts their beliefs while prioritizing what confirms their own. This latter phenomenon, known as confirmation or myside bias, is a potent force in our politics and information landscape. This bias has been exacerbated by the widespread availability of information online and use of social media. Around 3 in 4 adults in the United States use at least one social media service, and people are as likely or more likely to consume news online over TV. On the internet, people are prone to receive information that coincides with their preexisting beliefs because they choose what to follow, they are exposed to content based on algorithms that feed on personal data, and they are connected with groups that share similar information. Vocal minorities with extreme views often dominate social media, which sustains algorithms built to maximize engagement and strong reactions. This can lead to an exaggerated prevalence of these views and increased bias and negativity against others. Consequently, those who mainly receive news through social media are less politically knowledgeable and are more exposed to disinformation and conspiracy theories. Biased voters and policymakers will not have the facts needed to make informed decisions about the challenges we are facing.

Polarization and bias have influenced how people feel about the leading challenge of these times: the COVID-19 pandemic. The vast majority of people skeptical about the threat of the pandemic are Republicans, while most of those concerned about adherence to public health measures are Democrats. In the 2020 presidential election, most Biden supporters viewed the pandemic as an important voting issue, and most Trump voters believed the opposite. Taking vaccines is also viewed through a partisan lens, with a gap of 30% points between Democrats and Republicans. There are similar partisan gaps in levels of confidence in scientists and trust in COVID-19 facts from the Centers for Disease Control and other public health organizations. As expected, perceptions on the government’s response fell on party lines, as most Trump supporters considered the administration had done a good job, while only a minority of opponents believed the same. These surveys present a problematic picture in which Democrats and Republicans perceive the pandemic in starkly different ways. This bias affects behavior and can be associated with the toll of the pandemic on the lives and livelihoods of Americans. Political affiliation was a key predictor of the degree of physical distancing and mask usage. Stay-at-home orders were more effective in controlling movement in Democratic counties than Republican ones. Lesser distancing in Republican counties was also correlated with increased rates of COVID-19 infection and deaths. The political party of governments could predict whether states had mask mandates, limitations on gatherings, and lockdowns. In all these studies, the partisan bias held even when considering differences in socioeconomic status, mandates, and rates of infection. Even though mask usage has increased across all political affiliations over time, a recent poll indicated a prevailing partisan gap, with 87% of Democrats and 55% of Republicans reporting they always used a mask outside the home. Analogously, 87% of Democrats and 50% of Republicans were willing to practice physical distancing for 6 months or more or until the wide availability of vaccines. If the establishment of and compliance with public health measures were not influenced by partisan bias, perhaps we could have better control over the pandemic. Indeed, properly-worn masks and physical distancing are outstandingly effective in reducing virus spread and deaths. Political polarization and bias can have pernicious effects, particularly in a pandemic that requires collective action to address.

What can be done to ease this polarization and bias and to have a better democracy? We talked about this with Dr. Jonathan Baron, Professor Emeritus of Psychology at the University of Pennsylvania, who studies decision-making in public policy and voting. Dr. Baron suggested it requires a change in the culture “on many fronts, including schools, universities, journalism, and the procedures of government itself”. Changes in government represent one end of the spectrum of possible strategies. Dr. Baron suggested assigning electoral votes for each state proportionally to the popular vote in the state, thus eliminating the winner-takes-all model that fuels the cutthroat nature of presidential elections. Dr. Baron also mentioned changes in voting procedures that could bypass our two-party political system. For example, in ranked choice voting, voters rank candidates and if no candidate wins a majority of first-choice votes, the winner is selected after considering the second-choice vote of those who voted for the candidate with the least first-choice votes. This system could promote majority support, ensure voters consider all candidates, increase candidate outreach to all voters, and reduce the likelihood of polarizing campaigns. Another reform could be proportional representation, a system in which multiple policymakers would be elected from large congressional districts, which may better represent all voters, promote the presence of third parties, reduce the likelihood of partisan districting, and increase voter turnout.

In the case of the role of social media in amplifying bias, some strategies include government regulation, taking down fake accounts, and limiting the spread of misinformation. Companies could modify their algorithms to reduce the role of engagement in pushing content to users and to emphasize trusted information from across the spectrum. In the area of communication, Dr. Baron called for better messaging about the ways journalism and science function so everyone understands the process of seeking truth through research, validation, and review. Journalists and scientists need to be more transparent by “being clear about the confidence” of what is being reported, “qualifying statements”, and “explaining where uncertainty comes from”. In general, speaking the truth is the way to gain trust from the public. On an individual level, political affiliation is increasingly tied to personal identity and that can make everyday discussions about these issues difficult to handle. Dr. Baron believes we can “respect people at the same time you tell them their arguments won’t work” by focusing on “what is being said and why” and attacking not identity but only “attempts to impose on others whose views should also be respected”. We must be open to changing our minds depending on new information by being “clear to yourself and others [about] how confident you should be about anything you say or believe”.

References:

1. Casselman, B. Jobs Recovery Goes Into Reverse as Pandemic Takes a New Toll. The New York Times (2021).

2. COVID-19 Map - Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center. https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html .

3. Waxman, O. B. The 2020 Election Set a Record for Voter Turnout. But Why Is It Normal for So Many Americans to Sit Out Elections? Time https://time.com/5907062/record-turnout-history/ (2020).

4. Heltzel, G. & Laurin, K. Polarization in America: two possible futures. Curr Opin Behav Sci 34, 179–184 (2020).

5. Biden Holds Wide Leads Over Trump on Coronavirus, Unifying the Country. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2020/10/09/amid-campaign-turmoil-biden-holds-wide-leads-on-coronavirus-unifying-the-country/ (2020).

6. Voters’ feelings about the election and possible outcomes. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2020/10/09/voters-feelings-about-the-election-and-possible-outcomes/ (2020).

7. Few Trump or Biden supporters have close friends who back the opposing candidate. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/09/18/few-trump-or-biden-supporters-have-close-friends-who-back-the-opposing-candidate/.

8. Finkel, E. J. et al. Political sectarianism in America. Science 370, 533–536 (2020).

9. Molla, R. Social media is making a bad political situation worse. Vox https://www.vox.com/recode/21534345/polarization-election-social-media-filter-bubble (2020).

10. America is exceptional in the nature of its political divide. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/11/13/america-is-exceptional-in-the-nature-of-its-political-divide/.

11. Drutman, L. This voting reform solves 2 of America’s biggest political problems. Vox https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2017/4/26/15425492/proportional-voting-polarization-urban-rural-third-parties (2017).