MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417248863 · doi:10.1109/tvcg.2025.3634777

Correcting Misperceptions at a Glance: Using Data Visualizations to Reduce Political Sectarianism

2025· article· en· W4417248863 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Visualization and Analytics
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSectarianismPoliticsPsychological interventionMotivated reasoningSurvey data collectionControl (management)Political violenceRange (aeronautics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Political sectarianism is fueled in part by misperceptions of political opponents: People commonly overestimate the support for extreme policies among members of the other party. These misperceptions inflame partisan animosity and may be used to justify extremism among one's own party. Research suggests that correcting partisan misperceptions-by informing people about the actual views of outparty members-may reduce one's own expressed support for political extremism, including partisan violence and antidemocratic actions. However, there remains a limited understanding of how the design of correction interventions drives these effects. The present study investigated how correction effects depend on different representations of outparty views communicated through data visualizations. Building on prior interventions that present the average outparty view, we consider the impact of visualizations that more fully convey the range of views among outparty members. We conducted an experiment with U.S.-based participants from Prolific (N=239 Democrats, N=244 Republicans). Participants made predictions about support for political violence and undemocratic practices among members of their political outparty. They were then presented with data from an earlier survey on the actual views of outparty members. Some participants viewed only the average response (Mean-Only condition), while other groups were shown visual representations of the range of views from 75% of the outparty (Mean+Interval condition) or the full distribution of responses (Mean+Points condition). Compared to a control group that was not informed about outparty views, we observed the strongest correction effects (i.e., lower support for political violence and undemocratic practices) among participants in the Mean-only and Mean+Points condition, while correction effects were weaker in the Mean+Interval condition. In addition, participants who observed the full distribution of out-party views (Mean+Points condition) were most accurate at later recalling the degree of support among the outparty. Our findings suggest that data visualizations can be an important tool for correcting pervasive distortions in beliefs about other groups. However, the way in which variability in outparty views is visualized can significantly shape how people interpret and respond to corrective information. Supplemental materials for this paper are available at this OSF repository.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.991
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.059
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.310 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it