The problem
Many Americans across the political spectrum misperceive each other as more politically extreme, personally different, and threatening than in reality. This is sometimes called the Perception Gap. In America’s mostly two-party system, Democrats misperceive Republicans, and Republicans misperceive Democrats, often almost symmetrically. Independents misperceive those in each main political party, but sometimes by not as much.
Examples of how Americans are more similar across politics than we think:
-
Policy topics and political viewpoints: Dozens of examples can be found in More in Common’s original Perception Gap study and in our detailed guide to Perception Gap data and resources. Our Similarity Hub built with AllSides provides hundreds of instances of policy and viewpoint overlaps between Democrats and Republicans, or supermajorities (≥70%) of Americans.
-
Perceptions of threat: Many Americans vastly overestimate the share of those in the other political party who dehumanize them, or show willingness to break democratic norms or support political violence.
-
Attitudes about each other: A substantial number of Americans see each other as more morally and cognitively inferior than in reality. Americans also incorrectly assume that members of the other party are both politically “extreme” and talk about politics “frequently.” Americans actually are most often politically “moderate” and only talk about politics “occasionally.”
-
Hobbies and interests: Americans may fail to realize shared interests, such as being a pet owner.
-
Demographics: Americans tend to overestimate stereotypical demographic categories in each party.
-
Some political misperceptions of each other directly relate to fears and associated feelings of threat. These include findings on dehumanization, democratic norms, and political violence. Other misperceptions can add to an overblown sense that those in the other party would be dangerous if they had power, or feel threatening to specific groups that are being misperceived.
Examples of fearful actions fearful people can take when when political misperceptions of each other are not addressed:
-
Voting for problematic or even dangerous candidates: People may vote for candidates who fight more than legislate, trying to prevent the other party from having influence.
-
Authoritarianism and illiberalism: Research on authoritarianism and illiberalism shows that these tendencies are usually activated due to perceived threats, especially to safety and security, even if the threats are exaggerated. People can then take actions to make the country more authoritarian or illiberal.
-
Breaking democratic norms and accepting political violence: There can be greater acceptance of breaking democratic norms and/or political violence, to prevent the other party from gaining or using power, if it is seen as so immoral or dangerous.
-
Impacts of political misperceptions range from small-scale to large-scale, from the personal to the country’s entire system of government. At smaller scales, the Perception Gap increases anxiety and hesitancy about having conversations, worsens the quality of those conversations, and harms relationships and communities.
Examples of how relationships and communities are at risk when political misperceptions of each other are not addressed:
-
Increased hesitancy and anxiety about having cross-partisan conversations: Many people will be uneasy having a conversation with someone from the other political party who they incorrectly think has completely different political views. This anxiety only gets worse with overly negative views about their morality or cognitive ability, or a perception that they are basically a partisan stereotype. In these cases, many will simply skip having a conversation.
-
Worse conversations about false binaries: The Perception Gap corresponds to wrongly assuming that most Americans fit into one of two policy positions (either the position of “the left” or “the right”). In reality, there are many policy options across multiple axes. As Amanda Ripley discusses in her book High Conflict, arguments that descend into binaries are unhelpful and even harmful. Research shows many Americans commonly see those in the other party as worse conversation partners than in reality.
-
Weaker relationships, self-segregation, and discrimination: Personal relationships have suffered because of politics. Research suggests potential for discrimination based on politics, such as for college scholarships. Impacts of the Perception Gap can include self-segregation and outright discrimination, with at least some younger Americans not wanting to be friends with, shop at or support a business of, or work for someone who voted for the opposing presidential candidate.
As covered in the previous section about fears, America’s system of government is at risk from fearful actions that fearful people can take. These include voting for candidates who fight instead of legislate, acting on activated tendencies toward authoritarianism and illiberalism, and greater acceptance of breaking democratic norms or political violence.
-
The More Like US solution
Research strongly suggests the effectiveness of correcting political misperceptions, which is a major reason More Like US has this focus. More Like US has built a robust Social Science Advisory Council to solicit feedback on initiatives and content for the public, and to make sure that More Like US’s approaches evolve as research progresses.
Examples of research strongly supporting correcting political misperceptions of each other:
-
At least two of three “winners” of the Strengthening Democracy Challenge: This “megastudy” led by Stanford only found three interventions that achieved all major goals of significantly reducing anti-democratic attitudes, support for political violence, and partisan animosity. Two of these interventions explicitly focused on reducing misperceptions, and the third potentially changed perceptions of elected officials.
-
First suggestion in a frequently-cited Nature article on the topic: Right before the 2020 election, more than a dozen researchers penned an article on the issue of political divides and potential solutions, titled, “Political Sectarianism in America.” The first suggestion involved misperceptions – “people’s faulty perceptions or intuitions.” The article has been cited more than 700 times.
-
Strong correspondence to a focus on cross-partisan threats: One of the leading researchers on political violence, Dr. Rachel Kleinfeld, Senior Fellow in Carnegie's Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program, wrote in 2023, “Interventions should aim to reduce feelings of threat, not just feelings of dislike.” More Like US takes this to heart, recognizing the increased danger of certain misperceptions that correspond more closely to threat, including dehumanization, democratic norms, and political violence.
-
In a country of over 330 million residents, scale is vital. People can “learn” about those in the other political party either face-to-face, or indirectly via the information environment. Yet opportunities for easily accessible face-to-face interactions have likely diminished, as the share of “landslide counties,” where one presidential candidate wins by 20 or more percentage points, has more than doubled since the 1970s. More Like US recognizes targeting the information environment provides an ability to reach people in locations that are less politically mixed, and those who may not have the opportunity, interest, or confidence to have successful conversations.
The roughly 69 million US members of Gen Z (those born between 1997 and 2012) are an excellent place to start when targeting the information environment, though More Like US also can work with those in older generations.
Discussion of the value of each aspect of the information environment More Like US targets, with a focus on Gen Z, including More Like US’s current initiatives:
-
Why: Among US Gen Z, almost two-thirds are active monthly users on TikTok, along with almost half on Instagram. According to Pew in 2024, almost four-fifths of those aged 18-29 get news at least sometimes from social media, outpacing all other sources surveyed.
-
How today: More Like US’s ReCAST Network, run with influencers Left-Middle-Right, is training creatives to make social media content that reduces political divides and can go viral. Mina Cikara (Harvard, Psychology) will be testing the effectiveness of this content.
-
How in the future with scale: Longer-term, More Like US seeks to make its framework to CAST those across the political spectrum in a better and more trustworthy light as more Complex, Admirable, Similar, and worthy of Togetherness common across social media content creation and even the Arts.
-
-
Why: More Like US can target the next generation of journalists. Even going back to mid-2010s, the number of internet publishing and broadcasting jobs outpaced newspaper jobs, showing the importance of digital-savvy younger Americans in the profession.
-
How today: More Like US’s Similarity Hub, built with AllSides, provides hundreds of datapoints for journalists to use to show common ground exists, even on the most hot-button topics. Myiah Hutchens (U. of Florida, Public Relations and Political Communications) will be testing the effectiveness of integrating these datapoints into news articles.
-
How in the future with scale: More Like US seeks to establish norms among student and practicing journalists to use Similarity Hub data in articles to show widespread prevalence of common ground.
-
-
Why: Combining enrollment data for high schools and colleges shows about 35 million students, with millions more when including middle school students, or training programs for young adults like AmeriCorps. Information about political misperceptions can often reach them via classroom instruction or events on campus, without need for students to actively seek out information. Various factors increase the importance of targeting students: classrooms provide excellent opportunities to build trust over civil discourse with fellow classmates over a semester or more, political identities are still often forming in adolescence and early adulthood, and the Sandra Day O’Connor Institute among others notes a “trickling up” effect in which students tell and influence their parents about topics learned in school and thus further increase potential for scale.
-
How today: More Like US offers a lesson plan / presentation (slide deck, additional information on the Resources and Opportunities page) for 1-2 class periods. Diana Owen (Georgetown, Director and Principal Investigator of the Civic Education Research Lab) will be testing the effectiveness of using the lesson plan in the classroom, on factors like motivation to have cross-partisan discussions and affective polarization.
-
How in the future with scale: More Like US seeks to integrate Perception Gap content into curricula, standards, district improvement plans, etc. These will institutionalize and normalize the teaching of at least basic political misperception concepts year after year.
-
More Like US is a proud member of the civics coalitions CivXNow Coalition, Maryland Civic Education Coalition, and PACivics, along with the broader democracy and depolarization coalitions Braver Network, Democracy Communications Collaborative, and ListenFirst Coalition
More Like US appreciates research support from the Institute for Humane Studies at George Mason University, and operational support from the International Center for Religion and Diplomacy (ICRD)
_.png)
_edited_edited_edited_edited.jpg)
