Threat and Worry (Often) Go Together; Salience Stands Apart – Patterns Across Descriptives, Correlations, and Ideological Associations

Authors

  • Linda C. Bomm Orcid
    Amsterdam School of Communication Research, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
  • Paul K. Bergmann Orcid
    Department of Psychology, University of Marburg, Marburg, Germany
  • Bert N. Bakker Orcid
    Amsterdam School of Communication Research, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Abstract

Societal threat perception, worry, and issue salience are central to research in psychology and political science, and previous research suggests considerable overlap between the three measures. Nevertheless, they have not yet been empirically distinguished. This study addresses whether the empirical patterns of these three measures are consistent and whether they yield congruent conclusions about political ideology across twelve societal issues. Using data from a diverse Dutch sample (N = 1863), we first show that threat and worry, but not salience, produce similar empirical patterns in terms of means and correlations, as citizens find issues more important than threatening or worrying. Next, we find that, overall, threat and worry correlate similarly with ideology—but also highlight exceptions—whereas issue salience often overestimates this relationship (Type M error) but rarely reverses its direction (Type S error). These findings clarify the unique roles of threat, worry, and issue salience in (political) psychology, offering a framework for future research on the threat-politics link.