The Psychology of Online Political Hostility: A Comprehensive, Cross-National Test of the Mismatch Hypothesis

Alexander Bor, Michael Bang Petersen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract (may include machine translation)

Why are online discussions about politics more hostile than offline discussions? A popular answer argues that human psychology is tailored for face-to-face interaction and people's behavior therefore changes for the worse in impersonal online discussions. We provide a theoretical formalization and empirical test of this explanation: the mismatch hypothesis. We argue that mismatches between human psychology and novel features of online environments could (a) change people's behavior, (b) create adverse selection effects, and (c) bias people's perceptions. Across eight studies, leveraging cross-national surveys and behavioral experiments (total N = 8,434), we test the mismatch hypothesis but only find evidence for limited selection effects. Instead, hostile political discussions are the result of status-driven individuals who are drawn to politics and are equally hostile both online and offline. Finally, we offer initial evidence that online discussions feel more hostile, in part, because the behavior of such individuals is more visible online than offline.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-18
Number of pages18
JournalAmerican Political Science Review
Volume116
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - 26 Feb 2022
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The Psychology of Online Political Hostility: A Comprehensive, Cross-National Test of the Mismatch Hypothesis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this