The Impact of Anti-Democratic Foreign Influence on Affective Polarization and Support for Democracy

Despite extensive research on aggressive Russian influence campaigns, we still know little about whether the public holds domestic politicians accountable for amplifying foreign disinformation. Building on theories of affective polarization and motivated reasoning, this article investigates whether citizens defend democratic norms when exposed to information linking populist parties to the Kremlin. We test this argument using a large-scale online survey experiment in Germany, where respondents are exposed to a novel visual treatment illustrating the network of interactions between the populist parties AfD or BSW and Russian disinformation channels on Telegram. Our results indicate that exposing citizens to these ties reduces positive affect for both parties, an effect driven primarily by non-identifiers. Beyond shifting attitudes, information about close links to Russian disinformation networks has important behavioral consequences. A paired conjoint experiment demonstrates that non-identifiers penalize candidates from both parties. We further identify a clear policy spillover effect in the AfD context, where voters sanction candidates adopting a pro-Russian stance and prefer those with a tough stance on Russia. Furthermore, while the treatment bolsters commitment to liberal democratic norms in the AfD context, we find no evidence of a defensive backlash among supporters of the newly formed BSW. We argue that while foreign influence information can polarize established political divides, it does not trigger identity-protective mechanisms where partisan identities are not yet deeply entrenched.