Using the BEL model employed by the “Big Structural Change” research group, this project examines the hypothesis that, in a globalized and digitized information environment, exposure to information is selective with regard to societal preferences, leading to false consensus beliefs. These, in turn, have negative effects on the perceived legitimacy of democratic institutions, which can facilitate 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 line with the conflict-escalation hypothesis(CEH), we assume that when individuals hold false consensus beliefs, the legitimacy of political institutions—which is central to the social structure—is called into question, and support for these institutions erodes, which can lead to disruptive structural change (BISC). As a bridge project, G2 also addresses the conflict-abatement hypothesis(CAH) by examining how false consensus beliefs can be corrected and legitimacy restored, ensuring 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.