A Replication of Stern, West, and Schmitt (2014) Indicates Less False Consensus among Liberals Than Conservatives, but No False Uniqueness

John C. Blanchar, Michael Alonzo, Christine Ayoh, Kali Blain, Leslie Espinoza, Marcos Estrada, Jared Gillen, Atziri Marquez, Joanne Miao, Victoria Overbeck, Camryn Slosky, Shruthi Srivatsan, Elise Talley, Justin Tucker

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

3 Scopus citations

Abstract

Stern, West, and Schmitt (2014) reported that liberals display truly false uniqueness in contrast to moderates and conservatives who display truly false consensus. We conducted a close, preregistered replication of Stern et al.'s (2014) research with a large sample (N = 1,005). Liberals, moderates, and conservatives demonstrated the truly false consensus effect by overestimating ingroup consensus. False consensus was strongest among conservatives, followed by moderates, and weakest among liberals. However, liberals did score higher than moderates and conservatives on the need for uniqueness scale, which partially accounted for the difference in false consensus between liberals and conservatives. Overall, our data align with Stern et al.'s (2014) in demonstrating left-right ideological differences in the overestimation of ingroup consensus but fall short of illustrating a liberal illusion of uniqueness.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)197-202
Number of pages6
JournalSocial Psychology
Volume52
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - May 2021
Externally publishedYes

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 Hogrefe Publishing.

Keywords

  • false consensus effect
  • left-wing politics
  • need for uniqueness
  • political ideology
  • replication

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'A Replication of Stern, West, and Schmitt (2014) Indicates Less False Consensus among Liberals Than Conservatives, but No False Uniqueness'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this