In line with the BEL model used in the “Big Structural Change” research group, the project examines the hypothesis that a globalized and digitalized information environment leads to selective exposure to information with regard to social preferences, resulting in false consensus beliefs. These in turn have a negative impact on the perceived legitimacy of democratic institutions, which can promote disruptive structural change (BISC).

False consensus beliefs arise from a misperception that a majority of others share one’s opinions. While the human tendency to overestimate support for one’s own views is well documented by an extensive literature in Social Psychology, the potential consequences of this tendency for political legitimacy are largely unexplored.

In terms of the conflict-escalation hypothesis(CEH), we assume that when individuals have false consensus beliefs, the legitimacy of political institutions, which is central to the social structure, is called into question and support for them breaks away, which can cause disruptive structural change (BISC). As a bridging project, G2 also addresses the conflict-abatement hypothesis(CAH) by investigating how false consensus beliefs can be corrected and legitimacy restored so that structural change remains incremental.

The project examines the prevalence and correlates of false consensus beliefs using longitudinal survey data and combines these analyses with survey and laboratory experiments that enable causal identification, as well as with simulation models on the effects of false consensus beliefs on disruptive structural change. Overall, the project will provide a better understanding of the political consequences of false consensus beliefs and promises to uncover mechanisms that lead from changes in the information environment to (demand for) disruptive political change.