Political Ideology, Prejudice, and Ideological Conflict Theory

Foundations of Bias and Ideological Conflict Theory

The tri-component model of bias structures intergroup bias into cognitive dimensions (stereotypes and beliefs), affective dimensions (prejudice and feelings), and behavioral dimensions (discrimination and actions). Perceived political ideology functions as a central mechanism within these dimensions, as identity minorities are typically perceived as liberal, while Christians are perceived as conservative. Ideological conflict theory posits that individuals express heightened derogation toward groups they perceive as holding opposing political views relative to groups perceived as politically aligned.

Evaluations of Politically Conflicting Identities

When evaluating intersectional groups with politically conflicting identities, such as queer Christians, both liberals and Christians perceive them as occupying a politically moderate middle ground. However, ideological conflict theory predicts reactions for liberals but fails for straight Christian conservatives. Queer liberals evaluate queer Christians positively in alignment with their perceived centrist position. In contrast, straight Christian conservatives evaluate queer Christians just as negatively as nonreligious queer individuals. When experimentally manipulating reported political ideology as liberal, moderate, or conservative, liberals shift their evaluations accordingly, whereas Christians exhibit equivalent negative derogation toward liberal members and rate moderate and conservative members equally in the middle.

Cross-Category Extension and Ingroup Favoritism

Testing additional cross-cutting identities—including gay and lesbian Christians, trans Christians, women in the military, and older atheists—demonstrates that ideological conflict theory reliably predicts perceptions, exhibiting even stronger predictive capacity for conservatives based on their personal ideological perceptions. Conservatives consistently evaluate intermediate or conflicting groups just as negatively as fully liberal outgroups. Liberals view cross-cutting groups like older atheists as equally likable, despite acknowledging ideological differences across specific subcategories. Across behavioral discrimination scenarios, individuals consistently protect members of their political ingroup while punishing political outgroup members more severely.