Political polarization affects mental health more than the reverse
Political polarization and mental wellbeing: asymmetric evidence for bidirectionality
Computers and SocietySocial and Information Networks
Summary
Political views that are strongly divided can influence how people feel mentally and emotionally. The authors found that these divisions have clearer and more direct effects on mental wellbeing compared to how mental wellbeing affects political views. Research on how mental health influences political polarization is less consistent and looks at related factors rather than polarization itself. They suggest clearer ways to study both directions together in future work.
What this means in practice
- •For public health planners: Design programs that address political divides knowing they more directly impact mental health outcomes.
- •For mental health policy teams: Create integrated mental health initiatives that consider political polarization as a contributing social factor.
A survey. It maps existing work.
Authors
Afrooz Mahir, Shivam Sharma, Juhi Kulshrestha, Mikko Kivelä, Talayeh Aledavood
Abstract
A growing body of evidence suggests that political polarization and mental health and wellbeing influence each other. Yet the two directions, how polarization shapes mental wellbeing and how mental wellbeing shapes polarization, remain siloed across disciplines. We review both literatures to evaluate the strength and alignment of evidence for bidirectional effects. We find that the literature varies widely in constructs, measures, and levels of analysis, and that the evidence for the two pathways is asymmetric: links from polarization to mental wellbeing are more direct, grounded in well-developed theoretical frameworks and social-relational mechanisms. In contrast, the reverse pathway is substantially less direct, with studies often examining cognitive and socio-emotional factors, or political outcomes adjacent to polarization rather than polarization itself. We identify clear gaps in the literature highlighting the need for future studies with conceptual clarity, unified frameworks, validated measures, and multilevel designs examining both pathways within the same empirical and theoretical setting.