Cited by 1,400Social and Intergroup PsychologyPsychology of Social InfluenceElectoral Systems and Political Participation

Party Over Policy: The Dominating Impact of Group Influence on Political Beliefs.

Cohen, Geoffrey L.·2003·Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Abstract

Four studies demonstrated both the power of group influence in persuasion and people's blindness to it. Even under conditions of effortful processing, attitudes toward a social policy depended almost exclusively upon the stated position of one's political party. This effect overwhelmed the impact of both the policy's objective content and participants' ideological beliefs (Studies 1-3), and it was driven by a shift in the assumed factual qualities of the policy and in its perceived moral connotations (Study 4). Nevertheless, participants denied having been influenced by their political group, although they believed that other individuals, especially their ideological adversaries, would be so influenced. The underappreciated role of social identity in persuasion is discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0022-3514.85.5.808

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • People were more favourable towards a policy proposal when it was described as coming from the in-party rather than the out-party, suggesting that general group-based attitudes drove issue preferences.

    “For instance, people were more favourable towards a policy proposal when it was described as coming from the in-party rather than the out-party85, suggesting that general group-based attitudes drove issue preferences, thereby leading to issue polarization.”
  • Identity-protective cognition is a mechanism by which individuals conform their appraisals of information to buttress beliefs associated with belonging to particular groups.

    “Accordingly, as a means of identity self-defense, individuals conform their appraisals of information in a manner that buttresses beliefs associated with belonging to particular groups (Cohen, Aronson & Steele, 2000;Cohen, 2003;Cohen, Sherman, Bastardi, Hsu, McGoey & Ross, in press).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cohen, G. L.
Affiliations
Yale University (US)
Corresponding author
Cohen, Geoffrey L.
Venue
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Published
2003-11
Volume
85
Issue
5
Pages
808-822
ISSN
  • 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1315
OpenAlex
W2151318005
Cited by
1,400
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 102 · 2025: 92 · 2024: 89 · 2023: 114 · 2022: 121 · 2021: 126 · 2020: 108 · 2019: 120 · 2018: 95 · 2017: 76 · 2016: 52 · 2015: 53 · 2014: 41 · 2013: 42 · 2012: 41
FWCI
19.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Psychology of Social Influence
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
Keywords
group influence, party identification, social identity, persuasion, social policy attitudes, ideological beliefs
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Awareness, Denial, Psychological, Female, Humans, Male, Persuasive Communication, Philosophy, Politics, Public Policy, Social Conformity, Social Facilitation, Social Identification, Social Welfare, Students

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review