Correct DOI: doi.org/10.1177/1360...

This article might be particularly appealing for people interested in:
🧩 the biographical consequences of activism
🌐 personal network analysis
⚖️ the tension between social cohesion and polarization

Our findings show how political involvement transforms individuals' social environments in complex ways and complicate the view that civil society participation always builds bridges ➡️ In polarized contexts, activism may expand mostly ideologically homogeneous ties but also erode cross-cutting ones.

BUT, interestingly, when asked about the consequences, activists were less troubled (although not unaffected) by these ruptures than non-activists.

This is why we call this a "relational toll", a common but acceptable cost of political engagement, likely due to lower aversion to social discomfort.

Why does this happen? We explore this qualitatively. When contrasting activists' and non-activists' accounts of their experiences, three dynamics stood up:

1️⃣ Greater identity exposure
2️⃣ Urge for self-disclosure
3️⃣ Need for ideological alignment

👉 82% of activists (vs 55% for non-activits) reported at least one damaged/broken tie due to political disagreements
👉 After controlling for many dyadic and individual social & political covariates through multi-level regressions, activists were 6-7 times more likely to experience relationship decay

Drawing on 76 personal network interviews and 806 relationships in Catalonia (Spain), a highly polarized context, we found that YES, politicaly-motivated relationship decay is significantly more common among activists 👇

We usually think of political engagement and activism as opportunities for new connections and expanding personal networks. But what about the risks of pre-existing relationships being damaged?
Our study asks: are activists more likely to experience politically-motivated relational strain?