Comprehensive evidence on affective polarization stems from bipartisan political systems with well-defined partisan identities and unidimensional measures of ingroup favoritism and outgroup dislike, while neglecting shared emotions and intergroup emotional dynamics. This study addresses these gaps. Before the 2021 German federal elections, we surveyed individuals in Germany concerned about climate change (n = 2,477) or asylum policies (n = 3,177) using a large, innovative social media sample. We assessed positive and negative feelings toward supporters and opponents of progressive policies on these issues and the perceived emotional alignment with these opinion-based groups. Cluster analyses reveal two affectively polarized groups, a group of resenters characterized by negative affect and emotional misalignment, and three groups showing affective differentiation but lacking emotional identification. Compared with the other groups, the two polarized opinion-based groups perceive themselves as being more emotionally similar to like-minded citizens and more dissimilar from those with opposing views. They also experience consistent, yet distinct patterns of emotions toward like-minded and dissenting others regarding anger, disgust, contempt, and joy. The two groups are sociodemographically distinct and have less contact with people holding opposite views. These structural divisions are reflected in behavioral patterns. Polarized groups engage in more political discussions, especially with strong ties. However, only polarized conservatives tend to engage in political discussions with weak ties, such as colleagues or acquaintances. Polarized progressives are more likely to engage in collective forms of political mobilization. In essence, this work underscores the interplay among the emotional, structural, and interactional components of issue-based affective polarization.
Dametto et al. (2026) studied this question.