The abortion divide: Exploring the role of exclusion, loss of significance and identity in the radicalization process

Introduction

Recently, the abortion issue has entered the spotlight in the USA, leading to potential radical actions. As the majority opinion on the abortion issue vary with state, some individuals will be in the numerical minority within their state, possibly evoking feelings of exclusion. Social exclusion can motivate a radicalization process. The aim of this paper is to explore how individuals in a numerical minority experience feelings of exclusion and significance loss and how this may drive radicalization in the context of the abortion issue.

Methods

A quasi-experimental design was used and 534 respondents from naturally occurring numerical minority and majority groups based on state abortion opinion participated in an online survey.

Results

Results showed that those in the numerical minority experienced exclusion and were more willing to engage in and endorse radical actions compared to those in the majority, regardless of position on the abortion issue. Serial mediation analysis revealed that the pathway between minority group status and engagement and endorsement of extreme actions was fully mediated by need-threat and ingroup identity.

Discussion

Being in the numerical minority is associated with feelings of social exclusion, which may trigger a radicalization process. The results advance our understanding of when and who is vulnerable to radicalization and that social structures that perpetuate marginalization and inequality may contribute to radicalization. Results highlight the need to continue to explore radicalization from a group-based perspective and emphasize exploring mediating factors as a pathway from social experiences to willingness to engage with radical groups.

Regaining power: How feelings of exclusion during COVID-19 are associated with radicalism among critics of containment policies

Past experimental research has shown that social exclusion can be linked with radicalism. During the COVID-19 pandemic, feelings of social isolation and loneliness rose, just like protests and violence against national anti-COVID-19 measures did. Based on these observations, we hypothesized that feelings of exclusion induced by measures to contain the spread of COVID-19 were associated with radicalism intentions to illegally and violently fight COVID-19-related regulations among critics of the containment policies (Hypothesis 1). Moreover, we expected that radicalism intentions against COVID-19-related regulations fortified needs deprived by social exclusion (Hypothesis 2). Studying a sample of individuals who opposed the measures to contain the spread of COVID-19 (N = 171), we found evidence for both hypotheses: Results revealed that feelings of social exclusion induced by COVID-19 containment measures predicted radicalism intentions. Moreover, the relationship between exclusion and radicalism was associated with fortifying power issues. Political opinion did not moderate these effects. These data replicate the exclusion-radicalism link in the COVID-19 crisis and add one more factor that may have promoted radical developments during that time. Fortifying feelings of power, radicalism appeared to foster well-being, though at a high political price.