English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

There appears to be a dilemma between the freedom of expression andprotection from the adverse effects of uncivil political expression online.While previous studies have revealed various factors that affect attitudestoward freedom of expression and speech restrictions, it is less clear whetherpeople have intergroup biases when forming these attitudes. To address thisgap, the present study conducted a pre-registered online survey experiment andinvestigated people's attitudes toward uncivil political expression byrandomizing its in-group and out-group affiliations. The results revealed thatpeople tend to perceive uncivil political expression directed from an out-grouptoward an in-group as more uncivil, compared to the expression originating froman in-group toward an out-group. This difference subsequently influences theirinclination to endorse speech restrictions when faced with uncivil politicalcomments: stronger support for restrictions on expressions from the out-grouptoward the in-group as opposed to those from the in-group toward the out-group.These findings should serve as a wake-up call to public opinion that advocatesfor restrictions on uncivil political expression.

Intergroup Bias in Attitudes Toward Restrictions on Uncivil Political Expression and Its Underlying Mechanisms