Research data for paper: Social Norms Misperception Among Voters in the 2020 US Presidential Election
Data for paper appearing in Journal of Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy (publication date yet to be announced).
The files contain the following de-identified data:
- wave 1 (prior to US presidential election 2020) data collection (US survey_t1_deidentified) and for wave 2 (after US election) data collection (US survey_t2_deidentified)
- a merged dataset (containing data from both waves, participants were removed in accordance with exclusion criteria)
- readme file (provides description of variables and instruction how to use them)
- R syntax (US_survey_for public) with code used in this study
We aim to explain the dynamics enabling spikes in hate crimes by examining the underlying social-psychological processes behind it. We see these as captured in empowerment processes amongst racist who see themselves as “victims” and their position strengthened by majority support from the public for their actions. Building on previous research, we investigated the role social norm misperception (false consensus and pluralistic ignorance), following elections plays as a possible, generally occurring mechanism, which particular focus on Republican Party supporters. In a two-wave panel study, we surveyed Democrat and Republican supporters on social norms misperception, as well as collective empowerment, and xenophobic behavioural intentions. While we could replicate and strengthen our arguments and establish robust group-dependent effects for social norms misperception and illustrate that an unexpected outcome of the election led to disempowerment amongst Republicans, we found null effects for changes in social norms misperception, and for behavioural intentions. Our study contributes to understanding social norms misperception as associated with group membership. Deriving from that, the study results indicate that the perception of a majority agreeing with one´s approval is potentially less influenced by external factors, in contrast to feelings of joy and group efficacy – collective empowerment. Practical implications of group differences regarding post-election collective actions are discussed.
I confirm that the data contains no identifiable information relating to any living individual and that it would not be possible to identify a living individual if combined with another available dataset. I confirm that there are no commercial partners involved in the research that might affect the publication of this data.