The surprising influence of politics on your choice of chocolate

Political identities shape far more than just voting habits. They influence how you perceive apolitical aspects of daily life—like your favorite chocolate or clothing styles.

Research from Linköping University in Sweden has unveiled how deeply political affiliations infiltrate neutral domains, leading to what’s called political distancing. This phenomenon is more than a behavioral quirk; it has profound implications for societal polarization.

People often associate certain preferences with their political in-groups or out-groups. For example, you might instinctively avoid a brand or charity if you know it’s favored by a political opponent. This behavior, according to researchers, is driven by a desire to maintain cognitive consistency or signal social identity.

Political identities are among the strongest social identities, especially in polarized environments like the United States. Studies show that partisan affiliations influence emotions, trust, and even the willingness to interact with others.

In fact, measures of affective polarization—emotional animosity between political in- and out-groups—reveal increasing distrust and avoidance of political opponents.

The Swedish research team conducted four studies to explore this phenomenon in apolitical contexts. The findings demonstrate that even neutral products and behaviors are not immune to political bias.

Study 1: Clothing Preferences
Participants first evaluated formal clothing worn by faceless models. When the models were later revealed to be well-known politicians, opinions shifted dramatically. Clothes worn by politicians from participants’ least-liked parties were rated as less stylish than before.

Study 2: Chocolate Bias
Over 800 participants rated chocolate brands before and after being told which brands their political opponents or allies preferred. Chocolate associated with political opponents lost appeal, while preferences for in-group favorites remained unchanged.

Study 3: Charitable Donations
More than 1,200 people assessed their willingness to donate to charities. Participants were less likely to support organizations perceived as favored by political opponents, even when the charities themselves were neutral.

Study 4: Public vs. Private Choices
In the final study, 1,295 participants made product choices under varying conditions. When participants believed their choices were observed by members of their political in-group, the tendency to avoid opponent-associated products grew stronger. This suggests that self-presentation amplifies political distancing.

Why does this happen? According to cognitive psychology, people strive for consistency in their attitudes and beliefs. When you learn that a disliked political out-group favors a neutral product, it creates a psychological imbalance. To restore harmony, you might unconsciously devalue the product.

This effect is also tied to self-presentation. Publicly signaling loyalty to your political in-group—while distancing yourself from the out-group—can enhance social standing. These behaviors may offer short-term social rewards but contribute to long-term societal polarization.

Political distancing is not unique to the United States. While much research has focused on America’s two-party system, this study used data from Sweden’s multi-party system, revealing similar patterns. Such findings suggest that political polarization—and its influence on apolitical domains—transcends specific political structures.

In Sweden, political blocs span a wide ideological spectrum, from environmentalist to nationalist-conservative parties. Despite these differences, the tendency to associate neutral products with political identities remains consistent. This reinforces the idea that polarization is a global challenge.

Senior associate professor Arvid Erlandsson, who led the research, explains the broader consequences: “From a social perspective, it can unfortunately be rational to distance ourselves from these neutral things, but this contributes to a more polarized society.”

The findings highlight how deeply politics penetrates everyday decisions, often without conscious awareness. Whether it’s avoiding a brand, dismissing a charity, or rethinking a favorite dessert, these behaviors widen divides in already fragmented societies.

Understanding the mechanisms behind political distancing could help you become more mindful of your choices. Recognizing these biases might make you pause before rejecting a product or idea simply because of its perceived association with a political out-group. As Erlandsson suggests, “Knowing about it might make you think twice, instead of just going on a gut feeling.”

This research underscores the need to bridge divides, not only in overt political discussions but also in subtle, everyday decisions. By acknowledging and addressing these unconscious biases, you can play a role in fostering a less polarized society.

Note: Materials provided above by The Brighter Side of News. Content may be edited for style and length.

Like these kind of feel good stories? Get The Brighter Side of News' newsletter.