A new study published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology has found that political identity is related to some of the most basic aspects of daily life, from how students move through their day to what they do for fun. Although the differences between liberal and conservative students were small, they were consistent and measurable. However, a follow-up study revealed a striking mismatch between reality and perception: students on campus believed the behavioral divide between liberals and conservatives was far larger than it actually was.
The research aimed to understand whether political differences extend beyond opinions and values to include behavior in everyday, nonpolitical activities. While political polarization is often described in terms of opposing beliefs, the study examined whether liberals and conservatives also live different kinds of lives—and whether others perceive those differences accurately.
“I’m really interested in everyday life,” said study author Sanaz Talaifar, an assistant professor at Imperial College London. “Kenneth Craik has a great quote about the importance of studying the seemingly mundane. He says, ‘Lives are lived day by day, one day at a time, from day to day, day after day, day in day out … lives as we experience and observe them are inherently quotidian.’ I was interested in whether even the mundane, ostensibly non-political stuff of everyday life is politically polarized.”
“I also think that we, as researchers, live in really exciting times. The technological advancements that have transformed people’s lives have also transformed how we do research. People always have their smartphones with them, and we can use that fact to collect data about what they’re doing in everyday life with an unprecedented scope and granularity (with their consent, of course). I was really excited about using data collected from smartphones to study the everyday behavior of liberals and conservatives.”
The researchers conducted two related studies at the University of Texas at Austin. In the first study, they recruited over 1,200 undergraduates to track their daily behaviors over two weeks using a smartphone app. The app collected data from sensors (such as GPS and microphone) and activity logs (including calls and texts) alongside short daily surveys. Students also completed a one-time questionnaire reporting their political orientation and basic demographics. This combination of passive tracking and self-reports allowed the researchers to capture 61 different behaviors in four domains: social activity, physical movement, academic or work-related activity, and leisure time.
Political orientation was measured on a 7-point scale from “extremely liberal” to “extremely conservative.” The students’ behaviors were then statistically correlated with their political self-placement, with controls in place to account for other possible influences such as gender, ethnicity, personality traits, socioeconomic status, and whether students lived on campus.
Despite attending the same university and living under similar daily constraints, liberal and conservative students showed subtle but consistent differences in their patterns of behavior. The differences were strongest in the leisure domain. Conservative students, for instance, were more likely to spend time in noisy social environments, attend religious spaces, and be present at fraternities or sororities. They also showed slightly higher rates of physical activity, including walking and commuting.
Liberal students, on the other hand, tended to spend more time in transit and visited more varied locations, suggesting a more mobile lifestyle. They also spent more time at home and reported higher use of the internet and social media. In the work domain, conservatives were more likely to be studying or attending meetings, while liberals were more likely to report working and spending time with coworkers.
Interestingly, some of these differences also showed up at specific times of day or week—for example, liberals were more active in the mornings, while conservatives were more likely to rest during that time.
“We knew from prior research that liberals and conservatives have different cultural and consumer preferences,” Talaifar told PsyPost. “We’ve all heard the stereotypes about liberals drinking lattes and conservatives driving trucks. Maybe some of those differences seem obvious. But I don’t think I appreciated the extent to which everyday behaviors that seemingly have nothing to do with politics or cultural stereotypes could also be polarized.”
“Moreover, I don’t think we would necessarily expect those differences when we’re looking at conservatives and liberals who otherwise have so much in common otherwise — they’re all on the same campus, in the same city, roughly the same age, pursuing the same education, and living the same kind of student lifestyle. Even under those conditions, you see that liberals and conservatives behave differently in everyday life.”
These behavioral patterns were small in magnitude but statistically robust. On average, the differences were about the same size as those found between men and women or between different socioeconomic groups in the sample. Most of the associations remained significant even when controlling for potential confounds such as personality traits or religiosity.
“Something we don’t talk about much in the paper is that behavioral differences in everyday life weren’t limited to liberals and conservatives,” Talaifar said. “We found behavioral differences between women and men, upper and lower class students, as well as students of color and white students. So lately I’ve been thinking about how everyday life is bifurcated along all kinds of identity lines, not just political identity.”
The second study looked at how students perceived these behavioral differences. A new group of 156 undergraduates was asked to estimate how often liberal or conservative students on their campus engaged in the same 61 behaviors. Their task was to indicate whether they believed liberals or conservatives were more likely to engage in each behavior, or whether there was no difference. The researchers then compared these perceptions to the actual behavioral data from Study 1.
The results of Study 2 showed a strong disconnect between perception and reality. Most students significantly overestimated how much liberal and conservative students differed in their daily behaviors. When asked to guess which group did a particular activity more, students were incorrect about three out of every four behaviors. Most of the inaccuracies involved imagining partisan differences that did not exist. For example, students frequently assumed conservatives were more likely to commute, even though the data showed no such difference.
The researchers found that students were most accurate when judging leisure behaviors—the domain where real differences were most pronounced. But they were far less accurate in estimating partisan differences in social and work-related behaviors. This suggests that people may be more attuned to visible lifestyle cues, while underestimating—or misunderstanding—less observable daily patterns.
Together, these studies highlight a double layer of polarization: one that exists in behavior, and one that exists in perception. While political identity does shape some aspects of lifestyle, the belief that liberals and conservatives live in completely different worlds is an exaggeration. That misperception may itself contribute to political division. If people assume that those on the other side of the political spectrum live fundamentally different lives, they may be less inclined to interact, cooperate, or empathize with them.
“Liberals and conservatives behave differently in everyday life, but not to the extent that people assume,” Talaifar said.
The researchers argue that lifestyle polarization, even when subtle, can reduce the chances of cross-partisan contact. People who live different kinds of lives—working at different times, visiting different places, socializing in different settings—may have fewer chances to encounter one another. But even more damaging may be the belief that these differences are vast and unbridgeable.
“The behavioral differences were robust and mostly held when we accounted for demographic factors like socioeconomic status, gender, and ethnicity,” Talaifar noted. “But it’s important to remember that the behavioral differences were small overall. There were many behaviors liberals and conservatives engaged in to a similar degree, and other students on campus generally overestimated the degree to which liberals and conservatives behaved differently in everyday life.”
The researchers are now building on their findings by exploring how lifestyle polarization may relate to other important outcomes.
“Right now we’re looking at whether the behavioral differences we found can explain wellbeing differences between liberals and conservatives,” Talaifar explained. “Prior research generally finds that liberals are unhappier than conservatives, so we’re investigating whether their everyday behaviors can explain that. I’m also working on a project that maps the everyday behavioral patterns of individuals with authoritarian tendencies using data collected with smartphones.”
The study, “Lifestyle Polarization on a College Campus: Do Liberals and Conservatives Behave Differently in Everyday Life?,” was authored by Sanaz Talaifar email the author, Diana Jordan, Samuel D. Gosling, and Gabriella M. Harari.
