Politicians Fuel Conflicts, but Fail to Quell Them
Conciliatory statements among Norwegian politicians make no impact on the population, according to recent research by Lars Erik Berntzen.
Main content
“When politicians accuse and attack each other, the public’s perception of political conflict increases significantly. Conciliatory words have no calming effect,” says Lars Erik Berntzen, Associate Professor at the Department of Government.
He conducted the new study in collaboration with Jonas Dræge at Oslo New University College.
“Previous research from the U.S. has shown similar patterns, but we wanted to test whether the same applies in Norway. The answer is yes,” says Berntzen.
Political Infighting Deepens Divisions
Norway is one of the world’s least polarized countries with high levels of trust. This could change if politicians quarrel excessively and pour fuel on the fire.
“We are not immune to the processes taking place in the U.S. and other countries, despite starting from a much better position,” says Berntzen.
If perceived conflict levels rise, it could, in the worst case, make society more polarized.
Negativity Hits Harder Than Positivity
The study shows that conciliatory messages from politicians have no noticeable effect on people. At least not in the short term.
Berntzen explains that this phenomenon is linked to “negativity bias”: Negative information generally weighs more heavily than positive information in how people perceive and remember things.
“Negativity from politicians strongly influences people, while conciliatory messages apparently bounce off. This applies both in the U.S. - which is extremely polarized - and in Norway. It suggests that the underlying challenge stems from basic psychology, not just polarization,” he says.
Politicians and the media thus have far greater power to escalate conflicts than to calm them.
“That’s important to be aware of,” says Berntzen.
Only Time Heals All Wounds?
The researchers suggest that repeated conciliatory messages could have an effect over time.
“Our interpretation is not necessarily that conciliatory words from politicians don’t work at all. But sustained repetition is probably needed. Our experiment couldn’t capture that,” says Berntzen.
What it actually takes to truly depolarize a heated conflict remains unclear. To find out, more research is needed, according to Berntzen.
“Distance in time from divisive events may - in itself - be the most important explanation for why societies depolarize,” he says.
Reference:
Berntzen, L. E., & Draege, J. B. (2025). Asymmetric influence: Politicians can fuel but not dampen conflict. Scandinavian Political Studies, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9477.70030
