Americans are increasingly reluctant to talk across the political divide, a problematic situation for a system predicated on a citizenry exploring a marketplace of ideas and arriving at policy consensus. This study seeks to illuminate this problem through a qualitative, exploratory study around the research question of how conservatives and liberals experience communicating across the political divide. Results are examined through a research framework that first posits the benefit of deliberative democracy (Habermas, 1996), then identifies two major challenges to such – the tendency to avoid uncomfortable political discussions (Eliasoph, 1998) and the emotional, identity-driven process of polarization (Iyengar and Westwood, 2015) – and finally turns to dialogic engagement (Nagda, 2006) for possible solutions. Interviews with 15 conservatives and 15 liberals are analyzed thematically and narratively. Findings are that actual cross-divide conversations occurred only rarely, as participants avoided them out of fear of jeopardizing relationships or reputation. When participants did interact across the divide, the interactions tended to be highly emotional assertions of identity and values rather than rational policy-oriented discussions. In an already divided context, these interactions contributed to escalating conflict dynamics. Participants nonetheless indicated a desire to talk across the divide and described factors that would assist them to do so, as well as examples of micro-cultures where such respectful conversations were a norm. A conclusion is that a quest for safety and comfort (cognitive, social, emotional, and physical) both drives the polarization and can help shape interventions to overcome it.
|Commitee:||Cooper, Robin, Duckworth, Cheryl|
|School:||Nova Southeastern University|
|Department:||Conflict Resolution Studies|
|School Location:||United States -- Florida|
|Source:||DAI-A 81/11(E), Dissertation Abstracts International|
|Subjects:||Peace Studies, Social psychology, Political science|
|Keywords:||Conflict dynamics, Dialogue, Interpersonal communication, Polarization, Political talk|
Copyright in each Dissertation and Thesis is retained by the author. All Rights Reserved
The supplemental file or files you are about to download were provided to ProQuest by the author as part of a
dissertation or thesis. The supplemental files are provided "AS IS" without warranty. ProQuest is not responsible for the
content, format or impact on the supplemental file(s) on our system. in some cases, the file type may be unknown or
may be a .exe file. We recommend caution as you open such files.
Copyright of the original materials contained in the supplemental file is retained by the author and your access to the
supplemental files is subject to the ProQuest Terms and Conditions of use.
Depending on the size of the file(s) you are downloading, the system may take some time to download them. Please be