About this Research Topic
One of the defining features of contemporary politics is a high degree of hostility in communication dynamics. Political attacks, uncivil language, and the use of appeals intended to trigger a negative emotional response (anger, fear) are common. The rise of political figures with a controversial and “harsher” profile - from Trump in the USA to Bolsonaro in Brazil, Duterte in the Philippines, and many more - coincides with the widening of fracture lines in the electorate, superimposed to traditional cleavages. Beyond simple disagreements, political cleavages increasingly include an affective component - a profound dislike and loathing for the opponents (“affective polarization”). Unsurprisingly, incivility and the use of toxic language in political discussions online is rife.
The existence of these dynamics is well-documented. Yet, research on negativity, incivility, and toxic talk has evolved mostly along parallel tracks, analyzing their presence and consequences in election campaigns, political discussions, and social interactions separately. As such, an embedded framework for the study of negativity, incivility and toxicity in politics remains elusive. Furthermore, the field lacks systematic comparative investigations, with the result that the contextual drivers and dynamics of negativity, incivility and toxicity in politics remain poorly understood. With this in mind, the goal of the Research Topic is to (i) investigate the relationship between negativity, incivility, and toxicity in (elected) political elites and the public at large, (ii) uncover the contextual drivers of negativity, incivility, and toxicity in a comparative perspective, and (iii) investigate their consequences for public attitudes (cynicism, trust, affective polarization), behaviors (including online), and political governance. The Research Topic focuses thus on three types of dynamics: (i) Top-down, that is, how politicians communicate with the public at large; (ii) Bottom-up, that is, how voters communicate about politics and towards elected officials, and (iii) Horizontal, that is, how the members of the public engage with each other (online) about political matters. Comparative dynamics, mostly neglected in the existing literature, will take a center stage.
We are particularly interested in manuscripts that investigate one or more of the following matters:
• The relationship between the use of negativity, incivility, toxicity (henceforth, NIT) by political figures (candidates, elected officials) and the public at large. For instance, are voters incentivized to be “nasty”, e.g., in their online discussions, when politicians do the same against each other?
• The contextual drivers of (NIT) in politicians at the public at large across time and space, e.g., adopting a comparative approach; and
• The consequences of (NIT) for public attitudes (e.g. cynicism, trust, affective polarization), behaviors (including online), and political governance.
Although we are particularly interested in (quantitative or qualitative) empirical investigations that address these matters, we are also open to theoretical pieces.
The existence of these dynamics is well-documented. Yet, research on negativity, incivility, and toxic talk has evolved mostly along parallel tracks, analyzing their presence and consequences in election campaigns, political discussions, and social interactions separately. As such, an embedded framework for the study of negativity, incivility and toxicity in politics remains elusive. Furthermore, the field lacks systematic comparative investigations, with the result that the contextual drivers and dynamics of negativity, incivility and toxicity in politics remain poorly understood. With this in mind, the goal of the Research Topic is to (i) investigate the relationship between negativity, incivility, and toxicity in (elected) political elites and the public at large, (ii) uncover the contextual drivers of negativity, incivility, and toxicity in a comparative perspective, and (iii) investigate their consequences for public attitudes (cynicism, trust, affective polarization), behaviors (including online), and political governance. The Research Topic focuses thus on three types of dynamics: (i) Top-down, that is, how politicians communicate with the public at large; (ii) Bottom-up, that is, how voters communicate about politics and towards elected officials, and (iii) Horizontal, that is, how the members of the public engage with each other (online) about political matters. Comparative dynamics, mostly neglected in the existing literature, will take a center stage.
We are particularly interested in manuscripts that investigate one or more of the following matters:
• The relationship between the use of negativity, incivility, toxicity (henceforth, NIT) by political figures (candidates, elected officials) and the public at large. For instance, are voters incentivized to be “nasty”, e.g., in their online discussions, when politicians do the same against each other?
• The contextual drivers of (NIT) in politicians at the public at large across time and space, e.g., adopting a comparative approach; and
• The consequences of (NIT) for public attitudes (e.g. cynicism, trust, affective polarization), behaviors (including online), and political governance.
Although we are particularly interested in (quantitative or qualitative) empirical investigations that address these matters, we are also open to theoretical pieces.
Keywords: negativity, incivility, toxic talk, comparative political communication, political discussions
Important Note: All contributions to this Research Topic must be within the scope of the section and journal to which they are submitted, as defined in their mission statements. Frontiers reserves the right to guide an out-of-scope manuscript to a more suitable section or journal at any stage of peer review.
