Ideological Favoritism and In-Group Favoritism: A Double Dissociation of U.S. Progressives and Conservatives

Abstract

People appreciate others who seem similar to themselves. Two well-documented similarity-attraction effects are in-group favoritism (i.e., preference for in-groups over out-groups) and ideological favoritism (i.e., preference for the groups whose ideologies align [vs. conflict] with one’s own beliefs). There is debate about whether ideological favoritism is stronger among conservatives, progressives, or neither, and research has yet to explore ideological asymmetry in in-group favoritism. Across five studies (N_total = 6,631), we confirmed a double dissociation: ideological favoritism was stronger among U.S. progressives, whereas in-group favoritism was stronger among U.S. conservatives. This pattern was robust across different samples of perceivers and groups and across various measures of aligned ideological beliefs, shared group membership, and attitudes toward the groups (i.e., judgments and feelings). We discuss potential explanations for the double dissociation. Certain psychological differences between conservatives and progressives (e.g., community orientation and cosmopolitanism) may direct their attention to different markers of allegiance.

Keywords

social evaluation ideological favoritism in-group favoritism double dissociation Alliance Theory

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abele

A. E.

Ellemers

Fiske

S. T.

Koch

Yzerbyt

(2021). Navigating the social world: Toward an integrated framework for evaluating self, individuals, and groups. Psychological Review, 128(2), 290–314. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000262

Azevedo

Jost

J. T.

(2021). The ideological basis of antiscientific attitudes: Effects of authoritarianism, conservatism, religiosity, social dominance, and system justification. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 24(4), 518–549. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430221990104

Balliet

De Dreu

C. K. W.

(2014). Ingroup favoritism in cooperation: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 140(6), 1556–1581. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037737

Baron

Jost

J. T.

(2019). False equivalence: Are liberals and conservatives in the United States equally biased? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 14(2), 292–303. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691618788876

Bates

Maechler

Bolker

Walker

(2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01

Bleda

P. R.

(1974). Toward a clarification of the role of cognitive and affective processes in the similarity-attraction relationship. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 29(3), 368–373. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0036003

Bond

Byrne

Diamond

M. J.

(1968). Effect of occupational prestige and attitude similarity on attraction as a function of assumed similarity of attitude. Psychological Reports, 23(3), 1167–1172. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1968.23.3f.1167

Brambilla

Hewstone

Colucci

F. P.

(2013). Enhancing moral virtues: Increased perceived outgroup morality as a mediator of intergroup contact effects. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 16(5), 648–657. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430212471737

Brandt

M. J.

(2017). Predicting ideological prejudice. Psychological Science, 28, 713–722. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617693004

10.

Brandt

M. J.

Cassario

(2023). Distinguishing between worldview conflict and shared alliances: Commentary on Pinsof, Sears, and Haselton. Psychological Inquiry, 34(3), 168–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2023.2274421

11.

Brandt

M. J.

Chambers

J. R.

Crawford

J. T.

Wetherell

Reyna

(2015). Bounded openness: The effect of openness to experience on intolerance is moderated by target group conventionality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109(3), 549–568. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000055

12.

Brandt

M. J.

Crawford

J. T.

(2020). Worldview conflict and prejudice. In Gawronski

(Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 61, pp. 1–66). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aesp.2019.09.002

13.

Brandt

M. J.

Van Tongeren

D. R.

(2017). People both high and low on religious fundamentalism are prejudiced toward dissimilar groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 112(1), 76–97. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000076

14.

Brechwald

W. A.

Prinstein

M. J.

(2011). Beyond homophily: A decade of advances in understanding peer influence processes. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 21(1), 166–179. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-7795.2010.00721.x

15.

Brewer

M. B.

(1999). The psychology of prejudice: Ingroup love or outgroup hate? Journal of Social Issues, 55(3), 429–444. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00126

16.

Brewer

M. B.

Buchan

N. R.

Ozturk

O. D.

Grimalda

(2023). Parochial altruism and political ideology. Political Psychology, 44(2), 383–396. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12852

17.

Byrne

(1961). Interpersonal attraction and attitude similarity. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 62(3), 713–715. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0044721

18.

Byrne

Gouaux

Griffitt

Lamberth

Murakawa

Prasad

Ramirez

(1971). The ubiquitous relationship: Attitude similarity and attraction: A cross-cultural study. Human Relations, 24(3), 201–207. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872677102400302

19.

Carney

D. R.

Jost

J. T.

Gosling

S. D.

Potter

(2008). The secret lives of liberals and conservatives: Personality profiles, interaction styles, and the things they leave behind. Political Psychology, 29(6), 807–840. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2008.00668.x

20.

Chambers

J. R.

Schlenker

B. R.

Collisson

(2013). Ideology and prejudice: The role of value conflicts. Psychological Science, 24(2), 140–149. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612447820

21.

Cikara

Bruneau

Van Bavel

J. J.

Saxe

(2014). Their pain gives us pleasure: How intergroup dynamics shape empathic failures and counter-empathic responses. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 55, 110–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2014.06.007

22.

Correll

Judd

Park

Wittenbrink

(2010). Measuring prejudice, stereotypes and discrimination. In Dovidio

J. F.

Hewstone

Glick

Esses

V. M.

(Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Prejudice, Stereotyping and Discrimination (pp. 45–62). SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446200919

23.

Crawford

J. T.

(2014). Ideological symmetries and asymmetries in political intolerance and prejudice toward political activist groups. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 55, 284–298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2014.08.002

24.

Crawford

J. T.

Brandt

M. J.

(2019). Who is prejudiced, and toward whom? The big five traits and generalized prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 45(10), 1455–1467. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167219832335

25.

Crawford

J. T.

Brandt

M. J.

(2020). Ideological (a)symmetries in prejudice and intergroup bias. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 34, 40–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2019.11.007

26.

Crawford

J. T.

Brandt

M. J.

Inbar

Chambers

J. R.

Motyl

(2017). Social and economic ideologies differentially predict prejudice across the political spectrum, but social issues are most divisive. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 112(3), 383–412. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000074

27.

Crawford

J. T.

Pilanski

J. M.

(2014). Political intolerance, right and left. Political Psychology, 35(6), 841–851. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2012.00926.x

28.

Czarnek

Szwed

Kossowska

(2019). Right-and left-wing prejudice toward dissimilar groups in cultural and economic domains. European Journal of Social Psychology, 49(4), 807–823. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2548

29.

Dias

Lelkes

(2021). The nature of affective polarization: Disentangling policy disagreement from partisan identity. American Journal of Political Science, 66(3), 775–790. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12628

30.

Enke

Rodríguez-Padilla

Zimmermann

(2023). Moral universalism and the structure of ideology. The Review of Economic Studies, 90(4), 1934–1962. https://doi.org/10.1093/restud/rdac066

31.

Fiske

S. T.

Ruscher

J. B.

(1993). Negative interdependence and prejudice: Whence the affect? In Mackie

D. M.

Hamilton

D. L.

(Eds.), Affect, cognition, and stereotyping: Interactive processes in group perception (pp. 239–268). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-088579-7.50015-6

32.

Gaertner

Iuzzini

Witt

M. G.

Oriña

M. M.

(2006). Us without them: Evidence for an intragroup origin of positive in-group regard. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(3), 426–439. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.426

33.

Gallardo

R. A.

Smith

Zak

Lopez

Kirgios

Koch

(2025). Being in the minority boosts in-group love: Explanations and boundary conditions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000485

34.

Ganzach

Schul

Krampf

Pazy

(2023). Political ideology is not meaningfully explained by alliances and is not inconsistent with attitudinal inconsistencies. Psychological Inquiry, 34(3), 180–183. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2023.2274419

35.

Götz

F. M.

Gosling

S. D.

Rentfrow

P. J.

(2022). Small effects: The indispensable foundation for a cumulative psychological science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 17(1), 205–215. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620984483

36.

Graham

Haidt

Nosek

B. A.

(2009). Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(5), 1029–1046. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015141

37.

Green

MacLeod

C. J.

(2016). SIMR: An R package for power analysis of generalized linear mixed models by simulation. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 7, 493–498. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12504

38.

Gutsell

J. N.

Inzlicht

(2012). Intergroup differences in the sharing of emotive states: Neural evidence of an empathy gap. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 7(5), 596–603. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsr035

39.

Haidt

(2012). The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion. Pantheon/Random House.

40.

Hogg

M. A.

Hohman

Z. P.

Rivera

J. E.

(2008). Why do people join groups? Three motivational accounts from social psychology. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2(3), 1269–1280. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2008.00099.x

41.

Imhoff

Koch

Flade

(2018). (Pre)occupations: A data-driven model of jobs and its consequences for categorization and evaluation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 77, 76–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2018.04.001

42.

Jiang

Hoegg

Dahl

D. W.

Chattopadhyay

(2010). The persuasive role of incidental similarity on attitudes and purchase intentions in a sales context. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(5), 778–791. https://doi.org/10.1086/605364

43.

Jones

J. T.

Pelham

B. W.

Carvallo

Mirenberg

M. C.

(2004). How do I love thee? Let me count the Js: Implicit egotism and interpersonal attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(5), 665i683. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.87.5.665

44.

Jordan

J. J.

McAuliffe

Warneken

(2014). Development of in-group favoritism in children’s third-party punishment of selfishness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 111(35), 12710–12715. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1402280111

45.

Jost

J. T.

(2017). Ideological asymmetries and the essence of political psychology. Political Psychology, 38(2), 167–208. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12407

46.

Jost

J. T.

Glaser

Kruglanski

A. W.

Sulloway

F. J.

(2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129(3), 339–375. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.3.339

47.

Kandel

D. B.

(1978). Similarity in real-life adolescent friendship pairs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(3), 306–312. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.36.3.306

48.

Kassambara

(2023). ggpubr: “ggplot2” based publication ready plots. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=ggpubr

49.

Koch

Dorrough

Glöckner

Imhoff

(2020). The ABC of society: Perceived similarity in agency/socioeconomic success and conservative-progressive beliefs increases intergroup cooperation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 90, 103996. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2020.103996

50.

Koch

Imhoff

Dotsch

Unkelbach

Alves

(2016). The ABC of stereotypes about groups: Agency/socioeconomic success, conservative–progressive beliefs, and communion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110(5), 675–709. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000046

51.

Koch

Imhoff

Dotsch

Unkelbach

Alves

(2025). Ideological beliefs as cues to exploitation-exploration behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 117, 104718. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2024.104718

52.

Koch

Imhoff

Unkelbach

Nicolas

Fiske

Terache

Carrier

Yzerbyt

(2020). Groups’ warmth is a personal matter: Understanding consensus on stereotype dimensions reconciles adversarial models of social evaluation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 89, 103995. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2020.103995

53.

Koch

Kervyn

Imhoff

(2018). Studying the cognitive map of the U.S. states: Ideology and prosperity stereotypes predict interstate prejudice. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 9(5), 530–538. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617715070

54.

Koch

Yzerbyt

Abele

Ellemers

Fiske

S. T.

(2021). Social evaluation: Comparing models across interpersonal, intragroup, intergroup, several-group, and many-group contexts. In Gawronski

(Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 63, pp. 1–68). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aesp.2020.11.001

55.

Kteily

N. S.

Brandt

M. J.

(2024) Ideology: Psychological similarities and differences across the ideological spectrum reexamined. Annual Review of Psychology, 76(1), 501–529. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-020124-115253

56.

Kuznetsova

Brockhoff

P. B.

Christensen

R. H. B.

(2017). LmerTest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82(13), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v082.i13

57.

Lenth

(2023). emmeans: Estimated marginal means, aka least-squares means. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=emmeans

58.

Lickel

Hamilton

D. L.

Wieczorkowska

Lewis

Sherman

S. J.

Uhles

A. N.

(2000). Varieties of groups and the perception of group entitativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(2), 223–246. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.78.2.223

59.

Long

J. A.

(2019). interactions: Comprehensive, user-friendly toolkit for probing interactions. https://cran.r-project.org/package=interactions

60.

Lüdecke

(2023). sjPlot: Data visualization for statistics in social science. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=sjPlot

61.

Mackie

D. M.

Smith

E. R.

(1998). Intergroup relations: Insights from a theoretically integrative approach. Psychological Review, 105(3), 499–529. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.105.3.499

62.

Montoya

R. M.

Horton

R. S.

Kirchner

(2008). Is actual similarity necessary for attraction? A meta-analysis of actual and perceived similarity. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 25(6), 889–922. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407508096700

63.

Myers

D. G.

Lamm

(1976). The group polarization phenomenon. Psychological Bulletin, 83(4), 602–627. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.83.4.602

64.

Pavey

Greitemeyer

Sparks

(2011). Highlighting relatedness promotes prosocial motives and behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37(7), 905–917. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211405994

65.

Pinsof

Sears

D. O.

Haselton

M. G.

(2023a). Strange bedfellows: The alliance theory of political belief systems. Psychological Inquiry, 34(3), 139–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2023.2274433

66.

Pinsof

Sears

D. O.

Haselton

M. G.

(2023b). The strange epicycles of political psychology: A response to commentaries. Psychological Inquiry, 34(3), 226–238. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2023.2274618

67.

R Core Team. (2023). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/.

68.

Roberts

Koch

(2024). Perceived power polarizes moral evaluations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672241245181

69.

Romano

Sutter

Liu

J. H.

Balliet

(2021). Political ideology, cooperation and national parochialism across 42 nations. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 376(1822), 20200146. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2020.0146

70.

Ruisch

B. C.

Stern

(2021). The confident conservative: Ideological differences in judgment and decision-making confidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 150(3), 527–544. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000898

71.

Schoenmueller

Netzer

Stahl

(2023). Frontiers: Polarized America: From political polarization to preference polarization. Marketing Science, 42(1), 48–60. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2022.1408

72.

Shook

N. J.

Fazio

R. H.

(2009). Political ideology, exploration of novel stimuli, and attitude formation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(4), 995–998. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.04.003

73.

Sinn

J. S.

Hayes

M. W.

(2017). Replacing the moral foundations: An evolutionary-coalitional theory of liberal-conservative differences. Political Psychology, 38(6), 1043–1064. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12361

74.

Stern

Crawford

J. T.

(2021). Ideological conflict and prejudice: An adversarial collaboration examining correlates and ideological (a)symmetries. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 12(1), 42–53. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550620904275

75.

Tajfel

(1982). Social psychology of intergroup relations. Annual Review of Psychology, 33, 1–39. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.33.020182.000245

76.

Tajfel

Turner

J. C.

(1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In Austin

W. G.

Worchel

(Eds.), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations (pp. 33–47). Brooks/Cole.

77.

Talhelm

Oishi

(2014). Residential mobility affects self-concept, group support, and happiness of individuals and communities. In Rentfrow

P. J.

(Ed.), Geographical psychology: Exploring the interaction of environment and behavior (pp. 219–239). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/14272-012

78.

Turner-Zwinkels

F. M.

van Noord

Kesberg

García-Sánchez

Brandt

M. J.

Kuppens

Easterbrook

M. J.

Smets

Gorska

Marchlewska

Turner-Zwinkels

(2025). Affective polarization and political belief systems: The role of political identity and the content and structure of political beliefs. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 51(2), 222–238. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672231183935

79.

Van Hiel

A. V.

Mervielde

(2004). Openness to experience and boundaries in the mind: Relationships with cultural and economic conservative beliefs. Journal of Personality, 72(4), 659–686. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-3506.2004.00276.x

80.

Waytz

Iyer

Young

Haidt

Graham

(2019). Ideological differences in the expanse of the moral circle. Nature Communications, 10(1), 4389. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-12227-0

81.

Wetherell

G. A.

Brandt

M. J.

Reyna

(2013). Discrimination across the ideological divide: The role of value violations and abstract values in discrimination by liberals and conservatives. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 4(6), 658–667. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550613476096

82.

Woitzel

Koch

(2023). Ideological prejudice is stronger in ideological extremists (vs. moderates). Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 26(8), 1685–1705. https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302221135083

83.

Woitzel

Koch

(2024). Political rule (vs. opposition) predicts whether ideological prejudice is stronger in U.S. conservatives or progressives. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 153(10), 2454–2469. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001643

84.

Yzerbyt

Koch

Brambilla

Ellemers

Fiske

S. T.

Nicolas

(2025). Dimensions of stereotypes about groups. Unpublished manuscript.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.60 MB