A significant portion of White Americans, despite feeling a strong sense of belonging to U.S. society, feel socially excluded due to a perceived lack of recognition for their subgroup identities, according to new research published in the journal Political Psychology. This feeling of not being acknowledged is linked to greater support for Donald Trump among these individuals.
“Support for Trump and other radical right politicians is growing worldwide. While research has established many explanations for this by now, there are still many myths. One of them is that radical right people would be socially marginalized,” said study author (Peter) Luca Versteegen, a PhD candidate in political science at the University of Gothenburg.
“However, given that radical right support is often rooted in dominant social subgroups (e.g., white people, men, Christians), they are unlikely marginalized. In the present paper, I test one explanation for why they could feel socially excluded despite their historically dominant position: that they feel unseen with these subgroup backgrounds.”
To examine the subjective feelings of exclusion among Trump supporters, Versteegen analyzed nationally representative data from the 2016 and 2020 waves of the American National Election Studies (ANES). The analysis focused on a sample of 2,548 non-Hispanic White adults.
Two key variables were operationalized for analysis. The first variable, “superordinate belonging,” was measured by respondents’ answers to how important being American was to their identity, using a five-point scale from “Not important at all” to “Extremely important.” This measure aimed to capture the degree to which individuals felt integrated into the broader American society.
The second variable, “subgroup uniqueness,” was indirectly assessed through perceptions of discrimination against Whites. This was based on respondents’ perceptions of how much discrimination Whites face in the United States, again using a five-point scale.
Two methods were employed to measure support for Trump. The first method directly assessed the likelihood of voters choosing Trump over his electoral opponents — Hillary Clinton in 2016 and Joe Biden in 2020. The second measure was based on a feeling thermometer. This instrument asked respondents to rate their feelings towards Trump on a scale from 0 (very cold or unfavorable) to 100 (very warm or favorable), providing a nuanced view of their emotional disposition towards the candidate that might capture subtler levels of sympathy or support.
Versteegen identified a significant proportion of White Americans who, despite feeling a strong sense of belonging to the larger American society, perceived a lack of recognition for their subgroup identities. Specifically, his cluster analysis revealed that about 21% of White Americans fall into what the study terms the “assimilated” group. This group scored high on belonging but low on subgroup uniqueness.
Importantly, Versteegen found that individuals in the assimilated cluster were significantly more likely to support Trump compared to those who felt fully included (those experiencing both high societal belonging and high subgroup recognition) or those who were differentiated (low societal belonging with high subgroup recognition).
Versteegen expanded his analysis beyond White Americans to include other majority groups like men and Christians. The results supported this extension, revealing similar patterns of feeling excluded despite societal belonging among these groups as well.
In particular, men who felt a strong sense of societal belonging but perceived discrimination against their gender were significantly more likely to support Trump. Similarly, Christians who felt well-integrated into American society yet perceived discrimination against their religious identity were also more likely to support Trump.
“I was surprised that my results generalized so well across three very different majority groups – white people, men, and Christians. This suggests that my theory taps into a more general phenomenon that generalizes to the identities of other majority groups and possibly also other countries,” Versteegen told PsyPost.
“Trump voters are not socially marginalized – they feel they firmly belong to U.S. society. However, many of them feel disrespected as white people, men, and Christians – which is surprising given that these groups still enjoy many privileges in the United States. Individuals who report this combination –– feeling firm belonging to U.S. society while feeling disrespected with their subgroup background –– are more likely to vote for and sympathize with Donald Trump.”
Versteegen controlled for variables like age, gender, education, occupation, family income, religiosity, political and social trust, financial worries, place of residence, and White identity But it is important to note that the study’s design does not allow for causal conclusions about whether feelings of exclusion directly lead to support for Trump. The findings are correlative, based on cross-sectional data.
“This is a descriptive design, meaning that my data just describes that many white people, men, and Christians may feel excluded as they combine a strong sense of national belonging while feeling disrespected with their subgroup background,” Versteegen noted.
“This experience is associated with Trump support, but I can’t say that it predicts it. Thus, future research should experimentally induce feelings of exclusion based on my theory, and then test if this experience increases support for radical right politicians like Trump.”
Versteegen plans to continue exploring how identities influence political behaviors, aiming to shift the focus from their negative impacts to studying their positive effects.
“I’m generally interested in how people’s identities and emotions shape how they perceive societal developments and drive political behaviors,” he explained. “However, current research often looks at detrimental effects of identities and emotions in politics. In the long run, I want to study more positive effects, such as how identities and emotions motivate political participation, prosocial behavior or conflict reconciliation.”
“A lot of research suggests that historically powerful groups like white people, men, and Christians feel that they lose out amid recent societal developments,” Versteegen added. “While evidence shows they still enjoy privileges, we need to find ways to accommodate this experience. Doing so may reduce incentives to support radical politicians and may help fight actual inequalities in the long run.”
The study, “Trump Voters’ social position in U.S. Society: Uniqueness and radical-right support,” was published May 6, 2024.
