Search

What motivated Trump Supporters to storm the US Capitol in protest of the US Election results? We examined how different dimensions of an identification (Trump, Republican) predicted intentions to engage in activism or radicalism in the wake of the 2020 US Presidential Election. We sampled self‐identified Republicans 3 weeks before (N = 273), and 10 days after (N = 277), the US Capitol Insurrection. We separately measured identification as a Republican and Trump Supporter before assessing people's perception that the 2020 Election was illegitimate. We then assessed two emotions (anger, contempt) and two forms of collective action intentions (activism, radicalism). Both studies showed that stronger Trump identification, but weaker Republican identification, predicted perceptions that the 2020 US Election was illegitimate. Perceptions of illegitimacy predicted feelings of anger and contempt, which differently predicted normative and nonnormative collective action. Results suggest that different dimensions of identification predispose people to different perceptions of events and, consequently, harbor different action intentions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We investigated whether stronger religious fundamentalism predicted negative attitudes toward church–state separation as a consequence of perceiving low in‐group prototypicality (IGP). Across two studies (N = 635), Christians from the United States reported their religious orientations (intrinsic, extrinsic‐personal, extrinsic‐social, fundamentalism) before we measured (or manipulated) their perceptions of IGP. The dependent variables were attitudes toward church–state separation (S1, S2) and attitudes toward religious–national integration (S2). Results showed that stronger religious fundamentalism predicted negative attitudes toward church–state separation. Results also showed that fundamentalists' negativity toward church–state separation was stronger when Christianity was not perceived as prototypical of America's identity. Religious fundamentalism did not predict attitudes toward church–state separation when perceiving high IGP. Religious fundamentalism predicted support of religious–national integration irrespective of IGP. The results suggest that fundamentalists will oppose the separation of church and state when they perceive their religion is not prototypical of their national identity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]