The DOI matches its Crossref record; 23 of the 23 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Misperceptions in Intergroup Conflict: Disagreeing About What We Disagree About
Open accessAbstract
Two studies examined misperceptions of disagreement in partisan social conflicts, namely, in the debates over abortion (Study 1) and politics (Study 2). We observed that partisans tend to exaggerate differences of opinion with their adversaries. Further, we found that perceptions of disagreement were more pronounced for values that were central to the perceiver's own ideology than for values that were central to the ideology of the perceiver's adversaries. To the extent that partisans assumed disagreement concerning personally important values, they were also inaccurate in perceiving their adversaries' actual opinions. Discussion focuses on the cognitive mechanisms underlying misperceptions of disagreement and strategies for reducing intergroup conflict.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Emotional egocentricity lies at the heart of much of human interpersonal (Thompson and Loewenstein, 1992) and group conflict (Chambers et al., 2006).”
From Age-related differences in function and structure of rSMG and reduced functional connectivity with DLPFC explains heightened emotional egocentricity bias in childhood (2015) · cites this paper as Chambers et al., 2006
Citations
Cites
Lord, C. G., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1979) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.37.11.2098 · Cited by 4,583
The “false consensus effect”: An egocentric bias in social perception and attribution processes
Ross, L., Greene, D., & House, P. (1977) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/0022-1031(77)90049-x · Cited by 3,139
Perspective Taking as Egocentric Anchoring and Adjustment.
Nicholas Epley, A., Keysar, B., Leaf Van Boven, A., & Gilovich, T. D. (2004) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.87.3.327 · Cited by 1,316
Kruger, J. (1999) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.77.2.221 · Cited by 911
How we know--and sometimes misjudge--what others know: Imputing one's own knowledge to others.
Nickerson, R. S. (1999) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.125.6.737 · Cited by 841
Egocentric biases in availability and attribution.
Ross, M., & Sicoly, F. (1979) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.37.3.322 · Cited by 799
Social perception in negotiation
Thompson, L., & Hastie, R. (1990) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(90)90048-e · Cited by 671
Assimilation and contrast effects in reactions to communication and attitude change.
Hovland, C. I., Harvey, O. J., & Sherif, M. (1957) · Journal of Abnormal & Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0048480 · Cited by 662
Egocentric Biases in Availability and Attribution
Ross, M., & Sicoly, F. (2004) · Psychology Press eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203496398-12 · Cited by 660
Kruger, J. (1999) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.77.2.221 · Cited by 639
The Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Theory and Practice
Alexander, N. M. (2001) · e-publications@bond (Bond University) · Cited by 630
Chambers, J. R., & Windschitl, P. D. (2004) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.130.5.813 · Cited by 547
Robinson, R. J., Keltner, D., Ward, A., & Ross, L. (1995) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.68.3.404 · Cited by 478
Egocentric interpretations of fairness and interpersonal conflict
Thompson, L., & Loewenstein, G. (1992) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(92)90010-5 · Cited by 463
Wade‐Benzoni, K. A., Tenbrunsel, A. E., & Bazerman, M. H. (1996) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1006/obhd.1996.0068 · Cited by 186
"They saw a negotiation": Partisanship and involvement.
Thompson, L. (1995) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.68.5.839 · Cited by 182
Defending the Status Quo: Power and Bias in Social Conflict
Keltner, D. J., & Robinson, R. J. (1997) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/01461672972310007 · Cited by 177
Perspective taking and self-awareness: Drawing an E on your forehead.
Hass, R. G. (1984) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.46.4.788 · Cited by 110
IMAGINED IDEOLOGICAL DIFFERENCES IN CONFLICT ESCALATION AND RESOLUTION
Keltner, D. J., & Robinson, R. J. (1993) · International Journal of Conflict Management · doi:10.1108/eb022728 · Cited by 101
Extremism, Power, and the Imagined Basis of Social Conflict
Keltner, D. J., & Robinson, R. J. (1996) · Current Directions in Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/1467-8721.ep11452765 · Cited by 92
Much ADO About Nothing? Revisionists and Traditionalists Choose an Introductory English Syllabus
Robinson, R. J., & Keltner, D. J. (1996) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1996.tb00661.x · Cited by 86
Judgmental biases in conflict resolution and how to overcome them
Thompson, L., Nadler, J., & Lount, R. B. (2006) · Cited by 50
MISTRUST AND MISCONSTRUAL IN UNION‐MANAGEMENT RELATIONSHIPS: CAUSAL ACCOUNTS IN ADVERSARIAL CONTEXTS
Robinson, R. J., & Friedman, R. (1995) · International Journal of Conflict Management · doi:10.1108/eb022768 · Cited by 22
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Moral Roots of Environmental Attitudes
Feinberg, M., & Willer, R. (2013) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797612449177 · Cited by 928
Frenemies: How Social Media Polarizes America
Settle, J. E. (2018) · doi:10.1017/9781108560573 · Cited by 377
Westfall, J., Van Boven, L., Chambers, J. R., & Judd, C. M. (2015) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691615569849 · Cited by 363
(Mis)perceptions of Partisan Polarization in the American Public
Levendusky, M. S., & Malhotra, N. (2016) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1093/poq/nfv045 · Cited by 356
Graham, J., Nosek, B. A., & Haidt, J. (2011) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0050092 · Cited by 369
Metadata
- Authors
- Chambers, J. R., Baron, R. S., & Inman, M. L.
- Affiliations
- University of Florida (US)
- University of Iowa (US)
- Hope College (US)
- Corresponding author
- Chambers, John R.
- ORCID
- Inman, Mary L.
- Venue
- Psychological Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2006-01
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 38-45
- ISSN
- 0956-7976 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9280
- OpenAlex
- W2143730034
- Cited by
- 155
- References
- 22
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 8
- FWCI
- 9.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- autopapers.ssrn.com
- Locations
- Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Hope College Digital Commons (Hope College) (submittedVersion)
- SSRN Electronic Journal (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Conflict Management and Negotiation
- Keywords
- intergroup conflict, partisanship, ideological polarization, abortion debate, political conflict, cognitive mechanisms, conflict mitigation
- MeSH terms
- Abortion, Legal, Adult, Attitude, Conflict, Psychological, Female, Humans, Male, Politics, Set, Psychology, Social Identification, Social Perception
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
