Spoken Dialogues Promote Political Understanding: How Interaction Structure Affects Dehumanization of Political Opponents

When one person disagrees with another person on a political topic, he or she may attribute the disagreement to the other person’s inability to think reasonably about the problem. The belief that another person lacks sophisticated mental capacity is a form of dehumanization. The current research tests how the structure of the interaction between political opponents—specifically, the communication medium of the interaction (e.g., conversing in-person or over a text-based medium like an online chat forum) and the synchronicity of the interaction (i.e., the extent to which the conversation involves a back-and-forth dialogue)—influences dehumanization and consequently attitude polarization. In an experiment with paired political opponents, having in-person (vs. online) conversations reduced dehumanization, increased responsiveness, and reduced attitude polarization. Synchronous (vs. asynchronous) conversations likewise affected dehumanization and responsiveness but did not affect political polarization. This research provides insight into how shaping interaction features can affect political polarization and incivility.