In the modern era, political scientists and mainstream media have pointed to a political party realignment and class dealignment to explain the shifting political landscape. Given the range of political typologies (PEW, 2021) beyond the liberal-conservative spectrum, a range of actors – from politicians to campaigns and influencers – have used zero-sum message framing to reach the base and attract new voters. The current study examines voters’ beliefs about social identity and economics.
In contrast to decades of existing research demonstrating that social identities explain political party alignment, our findings suggest that a person’s beliefs about social identity groups—specifically zero-sum social identity beliefs—may matter more than a person’s social identity. A series of eleven ANCOVAs revealed that zero-sum beliefs differed systematically by political party affiliation across multiple domains, with Republicans reporting consistently higher endorsement of zero-sum social identity beliefs compared to Independents and Democrats. These intercept differences were largest for transgender opportunity beliefs (b = 5.409, p < .001) and gender-based sexism beliefs (b = 4.284, p < .001). For transgender opportunity beliefs, the intercept for Republicans was 5.41. This indicates that at the lowest level of subjective social status, Republicans scored 5.409 points higher than Democrats on the belief that “More opportunity for transwomen means less opportunity for people who are assigned female at birth,” almost reaching the upper limit of a 7-point scale. Similarly, for gender-based sexist beliefs, the intercept for Republicans was b = 4.284. This indicates that among the lowest-ranking groups, Republicans scored 4.284 points higher than Democrats on the belief that “As women face less sexism, men end up facing more sexism.” These findings suggest that zero-sum thinking represents the most pronounced political division in our sample within the domain of gender and identity.
The current study also advances understanding of how subjective social status moderates zero-sum thinking differently across political groups. The study found significant subjective social status × party affiliation interactions in four areas: wealth inequality (F= 4.064, p = .002), gender-based sexism (F = 3.831, p = .003), transgender opportunities (F = 7.143, p < .001), and LGBTQ+ rights (F = 6.857, p < .001). Notably, in all four areas, higher subjective social status was associated with a higher level of identification with zero-sum thinking among Democrats. However, the positive correlation between perceived subjective social status and zero-sum thinking weakened or even reversed for Republicans and independents. For example, regarding gender-based sexist beliefs, the interaction between social status and Republicans was significant (b = −0.574, p = .007), while the interaction between social status and independents was significant (b = −0.444, p = .045). This difference suggests that perceived subjective social status may vary based on political identity, which requires further investigation. These findings indicate that zero-sum and social identity beliefs are one dimension of political polarization in contemporary America. These beliefs do not reflect simple partisan divisions but appear to be constructed from the intersection of political orientation and perceived social status. Future research should examine the causal relationship between perceived social status and zero-sum thinking within political groups and explore whether interventions targeting zero-sum and social identity beliefs can effectively reduce political polarization.
Andrews-Fearon, P., & Davidai, S. (2023). Is status a zero-sum game?
Zero-sum beliefs increase people’s preference for dominance but not prestige.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,
152(2), 389–409.
https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001282
Barber, M., & Pope, J. C. (2024). The
Crucial Role of
Race in
Twenty-First Century US Political Realignment.
Public Opinion Quarterly,
88(1), 149–160.
https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfad063
Boland, F. K., & Davidai, S. (2024). Zero-sum beliefs and the avoidance of political conversations.
Communications Psychology,
2(1), 43.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s44271-024-00095-4
Brown, N. D., Jacoby-Senghor, D. S., & Raymundo, I. (2022). If you rise,
I fall:
Equality is prevented by the misperception that it harms advantaged groups.
Science Advances,
8(18), eabm2385.
https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abm2385
Chinoy, S., Nunn, N., Sequeira, S., & Stantcheva, S. (2023).
Zero-sum Thinking and the Roots of US Political Differences (w31688; p. w31688). National Bureau of Economic Research.
https://doi.org/10.3386/w31688
Davidai, S., & Ongis, M. (2019). The politics of zero-sum thinking:
The relationship between political ideology and the belief that life is a zero-sum game.
Science Advances,
5(12), eaay3761.
https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aay3761
Davis, S., & Sequeira, S. (2024).
Zero-Sum Thinking: Roots And Policy Implications. Hoover Institution.
https://www.hoover.org/research/zero-sum-thinking-roots-and-policy-implications
Esses, V. M., Dovidio, J. F., Jackson, L. M., & Armstrong, T. L. (2001). The
Immigration Dilemma:
The Role of
Perceived Group Competition,
Ethnic Prejudice, and
National Identity.
Journal of Social Issues,
57(3), 389–412.
https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00220
Hornborg, A. (2003). Cornucopia or
Zero-Sum Game?
The Epistemology of
Sustainability.
Journal of World-Systems Research, 205–216.
https://doi.org/10.5195/jwsr.2003.245
Meyer, N. (2025). The Democrats Embrace Dealignment. Catalyst, 8(4), 8–51.
Nadeem, R. (2024, April 9).
Changing Partisan Coalitions in a Politically Divided Nation. Pew Research Center.
https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2024/04/09/changing-partisan-coalitions-in-a-politically-divided-nation/
Norton, M. I., & Sommers, S. R. (2011). Whites
See Racism as a
Zero-Sum Game That They Are Now Losing.
Perspectives on Psychological Science,
6(3), 215–218.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691611406922
Rasmussen, R., Levari, D. E., Akhtar, M., Crittle, C. S., Gately, M., Pagan, J., Brennen, A., Cashman, D., Wulff, A. N., Norton, M. I., Sommers, S. R., & Urry, H. L. (2022). White (but
Not Black)
Americans Continue to
See Racism as a
Zero-Sum Game;
White Conservatives (but
Not Moderates or
Liberals)
See Themselves as
Losing.
Perspectives on Psychological Science,
17(6), 1800–1810.
https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916221082111
Różycka-Tran, J., Boski, P., & Wojciszke, B. (2015). Belief in a
Zero-Sum Game as a
Social Axiom:
A 37-
Nation Study.
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology,
46(4), 525–548.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022115572226
Wickham, H., Çetinkaya-Rundel, M., & Grolemund, G. (2016).
Whole game – R for Data Science (2e).
https://r4ds.hadley.nz/whole-game.html
Wilkins, C. L., Wellman, J. D., Babbitt, L. G., Toosi, N. R., & Schad, K. D. (2015). You can win but
I can’t lose:
Bias against high-status groups increases their zero-sum beliefs about discrimination.
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,
57, 1–14.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2014.10.008
Wojciszke, B., Baryła, W., & Różycka, J. (2009). Wiara w życie jako grę o sumie zerowej [Zero-Sum Game Belief]. In Między przeszłością a przyszłością. Szkice z psychologii politycznej [Between the past and the future. Essays from political psychology] (pp. 179–188). Warsaw: Polish Academy of Sciences Press.
Wong, Y. J., Klann, E. M., Bijelić, N., & Aguayo, F. (2017). The link between men’s zero-sum gender beliefs and mental health:
Findings from
Chile and
Croatia.
Psychology of Men & Masculinity,
18(1), 12–19.
https://doi.org/10.1037/men0000035