Abstract
Affective polarization-antipathy towards members of one's political out-group-may pose challenges to social cohesion and personal wellbeing. Prior studies have suggested that one's affective polarization may cause intrapersonal harm as well as interpersonal harm. It has been associated with reduced social support, increased stress, and worse physical health. This pre-registered study investigated the intrapersonal harm of affective polarization using a six-wave longitudinal survey (N = 470). Affective polarization, social support, perceived stress, and self-rated health were measured fortnightly for three months preceding the 2024 US presidential election. Random intercept cross-lagged panel models were employed to investigate the within-person effects of affective polarization on these indicators of wellbeing. Contrary to hypotheses, none of the hypothesized cross-lagged effects were significant, suggesting that changes in affective polarization did not predict changes in social support, stress, or health. However, cross-sectional analyses did reflect past findings, showing that higher levels of affective polarization were associated with lower social support, greater stress, and worse health. We additionally found evidence for perceived stress causing moderate increases in affective polarization. Stable differences by political orientation were also observed in our sample, with liberals reporting higher affective polarization and stress, lower social support, and worse health. Despite the lack of significant effects, potentially due to limitations such as sample size and measurement constraints, our findings underscore the importance of further investigations with appropriate robust designs to clarify the relationship between affective polarization and wellbeing. These results challenge the assumption that affective polarization directly drives declines in wellbeing.