When the tables are turned: The effects of the 2016 U.S. Presidential election on in-group favoritism and out-group hostility.

The outcome of the 2016 U.S. Presidential election was a big surprise to many, as the majority of polls had predicted the opposite outcome. In this two-stage cross-sectional study, we focus on how Democrats and Republicans reacted to this electoral surprise and how these reactions might have influen...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Burak Oc, Celia Moore, Michael R Bashshur
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2018-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5967817?pdf=render
id doaj-6481f34d1208416b8b4b0cc160da32fc
record_format Article
spelling doaj-6481f34d1208416b8b4b0cc160da32fc2020-11-25T02:05:28ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032018-01-01135e019784810.1371/journal.pone.0197848When the tables are turned: The effects of the 2016 U.S. Presidential election on in-group favoritism and out-group hostility.Burak OcCelia MooreMichael R BashshurThe outcome of the 2016 U.S. Presidential election was a big surprise to many, as the majority of polls had predicted the opposite outcome. In this two-stage cross-sectional study, we focus on how Democrats and Republicans reacted to this electoral surprise and how these reactions might have influenced the way they allocated resources to each other in small groups. We find that, before the election, Republicans showed greater in-group favoritism than Democrats, who treated others equally, regardless of their political affiliation. We then show that Democrats experienced the election outcome as an ego shock and, in the week following the election, reported significantly higher levels of negative emotions and lower levels of self-esteem than Republicans. These reactions then predicted how individuals' decided to allocate resources to others: after the election, Republicans no longer showed in-group favoritism, while Democrats showed out-group derogation. We find these decisions when the tables were turned can be partially explained by differences in participants' state self-esteem.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5967817?pdf=render
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Burak Oc
Celia Moore
Michael R Bashshur
spellingShingle Burak Oc
Celia Moore
Michael R Bashshur
When the tables are turned: The effects of the 2016 U.S. Presidential election on in-group favoritism and out-group hostility.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Burak Oc
Celia Moore
Michael R Bashshur
author_sort Burak Oc
title When the tables are turned: The effects of the 2016 U.S. Presidential election on in-group favoritism and out-group hostility.
title_short When the tables are turned: The effects of the 2016 U.S. Presidential election on in-group favoritism and out-group hostility.
title_full When the tables are turned: The effects of the 2016 U.S. Presidential election on in-group favoritism and out-group hostility.
title_fullStr When the tables are turned: The effects of the 2016 U.S. Presidential election on in-group favoritism and out-group hostility.
title_full_unstemmed When the tables are turned: The effects of the 2016 U.S. Presidential election on in-group favoritism and out-group hostility.
title_sort when the tables are turned: the effects of the 2016 u.s. presidential election on in-group favoritism and out-group hostility.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2018-01-01
description The outcome of the 2016 U.S. Presidential election was a big surprise to many, as the majority of polls had predicted the opposite outcome. In this two-stage cross-sectional study, we focus on how Democrats and Republicans reacted to this electoral surprise and how these reactions might have influenced the way they allocated resources to each other in small groups. We find that, before the election, Republicans showed greater in-group favoritism than Democrats, who treated others equally, regardless of their political affiliation. We then show that Democrats experienced the election outcome as an ego shock and, in the week following the election, reported significantly higher levels of negative emotions and lower levels of self-esteem than Republicans. These reactions then predicted how individuals' decided to allocate resources to others: after the election, Republicans no longer showed in-group favoritism, while Democrats showed out-group derogation. We find these decisions when the tables were turned can be partially explained by differences in participants' state self-esteem.
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5967817?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT burakoc whenthetablesareturnedtheeffectsofthe2016uspresidentialelectiononingroupfavoritismandoutgrouphostility
AT celiamoore whenthetablesareturnedtheeffectsofthe2016uspresidentialelectiononingroupfavoritismandoutgrouphostility
AT michaelrbashshur whenthetablesareturnedtheeffectsofthe2016uspresidentialelectiononingroupfavoritismandoutgrouphostility
_version_ 1724937732173594624