Zoom meetings come and Zoom meetings go, but a recent Xoom meeting stands out from the rest. The intriguing topic of “Group Polarization in America: How COVID-19 threw Fuel on the Fire,” was presented by Assistant Professor Dr. Joshua Fetterman, of Chestnut Hill College, Pa.

Dr. Fetterman notes the past 18 months have been hard on relationships. Rather than helping bring people together toward common cause, the pandemic created an environment ripe for group polarization (i.e., when opinions become more extreme after discussion with like-minded people).

According to Dr. Fetterman, “one of the most oft replicated findings in social psychology” is that “birds of a feather flock together … people have a preference for other people who are similar to them…with similar political views and values.” When this happens, the opinions of individual people may shift in the prevailing direction of the group.

One explanation for this is the so-called “persuasive arguments” explanation. The idea here is that if you enter into a group of people who believe pretty much the same thing, you’re going to hear a lot of opinions and facts that support what you already believe, but some of the things that you hear will be new to you. Basically, through the process of gaining new information that supports what you already believe, your opinion is going to become more extreme.

This isn’t a new phenomenon, as Fetterman points out, but recent events have supercharged it. He says: “The internet and social media, in particular, seem to facilitate group polarization (by being) tools that make it so easy for like minded people to find each other and to come together in groups.”

Fetterman observes that with COVID, we weren’t encountering the diversity of views that influenced us, previously, in the outside world. Our echo chambers began to echo a whole lot more, on the right and on the left, increasingly fueled by emotion.

The speaker went on to analyze some effects of group polarization on the political process and on democracy. His remarks made me think about bias and the groups I rely on for info. Do I seek trusted sources and balanced reporting? Do I gravitate to narratives which shore up my beliefs? Am I quick to assign evil motives to my opponents? Is outrage an addictive adrenaline rush? Is compromise a good thing? These questions loom, along with the mid-terms.

Runaway polarization will have done its job when we vote solely against rather than for, and when choices are knee jerk, in lockstep with one group.

Thanks to the American Democracy Project (ADP) and Department of Psychology at SUNY Fredonia for sponsoring Dr. Fetterman’s lecture. The League of Women Voters of Chautauqua County is a proud member of ADP.

Gail Crowe is a Fredonia resident.