Talking across the Aisle

Résumé

We conduct an experiment in which U.S. Democrats and Republicans engage in naturalistic video conversations about policy-relevant facts. We investigate self-selection into politically homogeneous interactions and how these interactions affect information aggregation and affective polarization. Participants exhibit a preference against crosspartisan conversations, explained by lower expectations about their informational and hedonic value. Indeed, participants find it significantly more difficult to extract knowledge from counter-partisans and, thus, tend to learn less from them. In contrast, crosspartisan interactions prove more enjoyable than anticipated and lastingly reduce affective polarization. Overall, cross-partisan contact may better serve to reduce affective polarization than to improve information aggregation.