Is there a more common term for that? I think it's a huge problem in polling. I googled and I didn't make much progress. I found this...

Expressive Responding in Support of Donald Trump: An Extended Replication of Schaffner and Luks (2018) | Collabra: Psychology | University of California Press

There is considerable debate about whether survey respondents regularly engage in "expressive responding" – professing to believe something that they do not sincerely believe to show support for their in-group or hostility to an out-group.

The problem is that "expressive responding" is a technical term. At Wikipedia I searched for "expressive responding" (in double quotes) and I got zero results.

Of course that mental mindset is big deal when it comes to Trump. A recent example - Lots of Republicans suddenly think the economy wasn't that bad after all. There's not exactly a "debate" when it comes to Trump and republican voters. They always do it when Trump is involved. It's not a coincidence that the election always causes a rapid change in what they say they believe.

  • Frank [he/him, he/him]
    ·
    5 days ago

    Shibboleth would be one applicable term

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shibboleth

    I've been thinking and discussing this a lot and mostly using "in-group signalling", which is clunky but I think that's mostly what it's called in Anthropology.

    I guess with GOP specifically we use "Owning the libs" as a catch all for when fash take a position they don't necessarily believe in because they think it will aggravate Democrats.

    • InevitableSwing [none/use name]
      ·
      5 days ago

      "in-group signalling"

      I'll go with that. It seems really good and it's far better than any polling term like "expressive responding" because that stuff reeks of polling guru dork jargon speak. It's crazy to me how American politics tends to be devoid of basic concepts like in-group signalling, margin of error, etc. Polling is considered some kind of augury producing magic numbers that can divine the future.

      I wonder how much time I'd have to spend at the 538 website to find their explanation of in-group signalling and I wonder what ridiculous term they use instead.

  • TheBroodian [none/use name]
    ·
    5 days ago

    I think you're describing virtue signaling. The name might be misleading, but I think your description is essentially the intended purpose of such an invention

  • miz [any, any]
    ·
    5 days ago

    I don't know if there's a term but it reminds me of that experiment where there's one test subject and a whole bunch of actors who gaslight the subject by all agreeing on an obviously wrong answer