How Soccer Builds Social Cohesion and Polarization Enables Electoral Malpractice

Facty Friday Edition #2

Political polarization discourages partisans from punishing electoral malpractice

A new study in Mexico and Denmark analyzed the effect of electoral malpractice (attempts to illegally influence an election) on partisan support for their in-party. The study found that partisans in both countries do strongly disapprove of electoral malpractice by their in-party, but not enough to switch their vote. Partisans tolerate electoral malpractice not because they disbelieve accusations of electoral malpractice or consider electoral malpractice by their party to be acceptable, but because they hold opposing parties in such low esteem that even electoral malpractice does not change their party preference. This study shows how partisan polarization contributes to democratic backsliding by influencing citizens to prefer a cheating in-party to a clean out-party. This finding holds across two very different electoral contexts.

Contact between antagonistic groups improves relationships but does not always generalize to the wider group

A study in Iraq evaluated the effect of a mixed Christian-Muslim soccer league on the attitudes and behaviors of Christians towards Muslims. Christians randomly assigned to play on a religiously mixed team (as opposed to an all-Christian team) were more likely to to vote for a Muslim (not on their team) to receive a sportsmanship award, register for a mixed team next season, and train with Muslims 6 months after the intervention. However, their behaviors outside of the soccer league did not change: they were not more likely to attend a mixed social event, patronize Muslim-owned businesses, or donate to a mixed NGO. This study shows the need to understand when and how intergroup contact improves attitudes towards other groups.

Do you have a study we should share for a future Facty Friday? Send an email to drg.el@usaid.gov!