Political polarization and mental wellbeing: asymmetric evidence for bidirectionality

2026-10-08

AI Summary

This study addresses the longstanding disconnect between research on political polarization and mental health, where bidirectional mechanisms remain unclear and a unified framework is lacking. Employing bibliometric analysis and systematic review, it integrates multidimensional data spanning cognitive, socio-emotional, and political outcomes to evaluate their interactive effects. The work reveals a pronounced asymmetry in this bidirectional relationship: the detrimental impact of polarization on mental health is more direct, whereas the reverse pathway remains indirect and weakly supported by existing evidence. Furthermore, it identifies critical gaps in current conceptual definitions and measurement instruments, advocating for the development of a multilevel theoretical framework to guide future empirical inquiry into these intersecting domains.

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.

Problem

• political polarization
• mental wellbeing
• bidirectionality
• asymmetric evidence
• interdisciplinary gaps

Innovation

• political polarization
• mental wellbeing
• bidirectional effects
• asymmetric evidence
• multilevel design