A recent study published in the journal Political Psychology has uncovered significant differences in how individuals with varying political ideologies perceive history across several countries. The research, conducted in six countries, found that individuals who lean toward the right are more likely to view the past positively, often driven by nostalgia for tradition.
Previous studies have extensively explored how political ideologies influence perceptions of social issues, decision-making processes, and even cognitive styles. Political beliefs have been shown to correlate with various psychological traits, such as openness to experience, which in turn affects attitudes towards change and tradition.
Research has found that right-leaning individuals often exhibit higher degrees of system justification (the belief that existing social arrangements are legitimate and should be preserved) and resistance to change. On the other hand, left-leaning individuals are more likely to welcome change and innovation, reflecting their more optimistic view of the potential for societal improvement.
Despite the wealth of studies on political ideology and cognitive biases, fewer studies have systematically explored how these ideologies influence the perception of history. The author behind the new study, Francesco Rigoli, an associate professor at City, University of London, sought “to better understand the reasons why, around the world, the right and the left appear to be increasingly polarized today. My hypothesis was that a key reason is their reliance upon two incompatible views of the past, present and future.”
To understand how ideological differences affect historical evaluation, Rigoli conducted a series of four separate studies.
The first study aimed to assess how individuals from various political backgrounds evaluate historical periods. Participants were drawn from six different countries — USA, UK, Italy, South Africa, Mexico, and Poland — to reflect diverse economic levels and political histories. In total, 200 participants were recruited from each country through the Prolific online platform, ensuring a sample that included an equal representation of left and right-wing supporters where possible.
The methodology involved participants evaluating the societal conditions during three distinct periods: the recent past (1950-2000), the present, and the future in 25 years under two hypothetical scenarios — one where society makes optimal decisions and one where it does not. Participants completed a questionnaire where they rated each period on a seven-point scale ranging from “very bad” to “very good”. Following this, they were asked to position themselves on a political spectrum from left-wing to right-wing.
Across all six countries included in the study, right-wing participants consistently evaluated the past more positively compared to left-wing participants. This trend suggests a universal ideological effect on historical perception, where right-leaning individuals harbor a nostalgic view of the past. Interestingly, no significant differences were observed in how the two ideological groups evaluated the present.
Rigoli was surprised by “the fact that left and right do not diverge in their evaluation of the present. The two camps diverge with respect to their appraisal of the past and future society, not the current one.”
As for the future, left-wing participants in the USA and Poland (and potentially in the UK) were generally more optimistic in scenarios where society was assumed to make sensible choices, indicating a belief in the potential for positive change contingent on responsible governance.
Study 2 was designed to test whether a positive evaluation of the past could influence a person’s political ideology. The hypothesis was that emphasizing positive aspects of the past might push individuals towards a more right-wing ideology. This experiment involved two groups of 100 participants from the UK. One group was asked to list positive aspects of the period from 1950 to 2000, while the other listed negative aspects. After this exercise, participants rated the period on the same seven-point scale used in Study 1 and reported their political ideology.
The key measure was whether the group tasked with recalling positive aspects would report a more right-leaning ideology compared to the group focusing on negative aspects. This approach aimed to understand if manipulating historical perception could have a causal effect on political orientation.
Despite successfully manipulating participants’ perceptions of the past (those asked to recall positive aspects viewed the past more favorably than those asked to recall negatives), this manipulation did not translate into a shift in political ideology. Both groups, regardless of the valence of the past they were prompted to consider, reported similar ideological positions. This outcome suggests that while it is possible to influence how people view the past, these altered perceptions do not necessarily affect their political orientation, at least in the short term.
Study 3 explored whether making ideological affiliations more salient would affect how individuals evaluate history. Participants were again drawn from the UK and divided into two groups, with 200 individuals in each. In the control group, participants first evaluated the past and then reported their ideological leanings. In contrast, the experimental group first reported their political ideology, listed their political values and beliefs to heighten the salience of their ideology, and then evaluated the past.
The findings confirmed that making ideology more salient (by having participants articulate their political values before evaluating the past) strengthened the relationship between ideology and historical evaluation. For the experimental group, where ideological salience was heightened, the correlation between political ideology and perception of the past was significantly stronger compared to the control group. This suggests that when individuals are more cognizant of their ideological leanings, these beliefs more powerfully color their interpretations of historical events.
The final study, Study 4, aimed to identify specific beliefs that mediate how political ideologies influence perceptions of the past. It investigated whether nostalgia for tradition (associated with right-wing ideologies) or redistribution (associated with left-wing ideologies) plays a role in shaping these perceptions.
Participants from the same six countries used in Study 1 evaluated the past and then expressed their level of agreement with statements reflecting nostalgia for tradition and redistribution. Using structural equation modeling, the study tested whether ideology influenced evaluations of the past directly or through these nostalgic sentiments.
Right-wing ideology was strongly associated with nostalgia for tradition, which in turn led to more positive evaluations of the past. On the other hand, left-wing ideology was linked with nostalgia for redistribution, which also influenced past evaluations but to a lesser extent. The structural equation modeling showed that nostalgia for tradition had a more substantial impact on historical evaluations than nostalgia for redistribution, explaining why right-wing individuals often have a more favorable view of the past.
“The study suggests that the divide between the left and the right is a conflict between two alternative stories,” Rigoli told PsyPost. “The story favored by the right calls for a return to a glorious past. The story preferred on the left calls for mobilizing people to construct a new society. These diametrically opposed visions for society make it hard to bridge the political divide.”
But the study, like all research, has limitations. The research did not account for other demographic factors that might influence historical evaluation, such as ethnicity, education, or income. Additionally, the study’s design could not definitively establish causality—whether political beliefs shape historical evaluation or vice versa.
Future research could explore these dynamics further, potentially examining how specific elements of nostalgia for tradition or economic conditions mediate the relationship between political ideology and historical evaluation.
Regarding the long-term goal for his research, Rigoli said he hopes to provide insight into “the collective narratives embraced by people with different political views worldwide.”
The study, “Ideology shapes evaluation of history within the general population,” was published March 24, 2024.