How issue opinions relate to individual-level affective polarization: Exploring the psychological mechanisms of affective polarization regarding immigration in a multi-party setting

This study explores how differing opinions on immigration relate to affective polarization via either moderation or mediation by two factors: (i) emotional attachment to people with similar opinions to oneself; and (ii) perceived threat from people with opposing views to oneself. The data for the study (n = 2,291) were collected from a representative online panel among Swedish-speaking Finns, a setting in which partisan animosity is low and the potential for issue-based polarization is higher. The key findings are that opinions on immigration relate to affective polarization on immigration, and this is mainly as either a moderation or mediation by emotional attachment and perceived threats. Pro-immigration citizens exhibit higher levels of affective polarization than those who are anti-immigration. Furthermore, we find that affective polarization among anti-immigration citizens is mainly moderated and mediated by perceived threat whereas it is mainly moderated and mediated by emotional attachment for those who are pro-immigration.