Polarized Minds: Exploring the Link between Ideological Consistency and Personal Well-Being among Medical Students

Polarized Minds: Exploring the Link between Ideological Consistency and Personal Well-Being among Medical Students | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Polarized Minds: Exploring the Link between Ideological Consistency and Personal Well-Being among Medical Students Adit Parerikkal Jeyan, Dhansree Sarangamurali, Madhavan H Varadarajan, and 4 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7091567/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Background Political polarization refers to the phenomenon of people moving away from the center and leaning towards extreme political ideologies. In recent years, there has been a discernible escalation of political polarization, which has significant implications for public health,. Studies have shown that heightened political animosity can lead to increased stress, anxiety, and a decline in mental well-being. Methods This research investigates whether these experiences impact people's well-being across the ideological spectrum. With a cross-sectional research design, the study recruited 1023 undergraduate medical students aged 18–27 years, from Chennai, Tamil Nadu using census sampling. The study parameters were measured using self-report questionnaires: the Ideology Consistency Scale (ICS) and the Personality Well-Being Index - Adult − 5 (PWI-A). Results & Discussion The results revealed a significant negative correlation between ideological consistency and personal well-being (ρ = – 0.453, p = 0.006). This indicates that individuals with stronger ideological alignment are likely to experience lower subjective well- being. Furthermore, personal well-being differed significantly based on sexual orientation ( χ² ( 2 ) = 9.73, p = 0.008) and locality ( χ² ( 2 ) = 18.78, p < 0.001). Families with political affiliations were significantly associated with lower personal well-being compared to those without ( U = 9819, p = 0.002), but no significant difference was observed in ideological consistency rural background, and sexual orientation. Conclusion Political polarization has a significant association with personal well-being. Promoting cognitive openness and balanced political discourse may help mitigate the mental health consequences of polarization. Ideological consistency personal well-being and political polarization Figures Figure 1 INTRODUCTION Political polarity (PP) refers to skewedness an individual holds in their political views, typically away from centralised political ideologies. Throughout history, political polarization has led to activism, advocacy for rights, and conflicts between opposing political groups. However, in modern times, the intensifications of political debates have deepened ideological divisions creating animosity between different groups. Unsolicited exposure to polarised political groups among vulnerable populations, such as students or young adults, may pose latent negative schemata or affect, owing to modern democratic settings. Observing the crux of Western Politics gives us a picture of two significantly distinct divisions, i.e., conservatives and liberals. Conservatives raise their support for binding values such as free-market principles, limited government intervention, and moral absolutism, carrying traditional connotations. On the other side of the spectrum, liberals try to promote individualizing values such as fairness in authority, abolishing social inequalities, and progressive reforms in socio-political issues. In addition, a multitude of individuals holds mixed or moderate ideologies, having centralised standpoints across the spectrum. Intensified polarization in politics may manifest effects on an individual’s well-being. Fraser et al. (2022) reveal through their studies that higher levels of ideological polarization in politics plausibly lead to more adverse psychological outcomes, such as anxiety, depression, and sleep disorders. Nelson (2022) concludes that even mere exposure to politically charged content continuously might worsen these mental health concerns by generating echo chambers, which maintain the pre-existing views and escalating aversion towards opposing political groups. Furthermore, Chen & Rohla (2018) discussed the profound impact that political disagreements can have on personal relationships and social well-being. Ideological consistency (IC) can be explained as the congruence of an individual's beliefs and viewpoints across various political issues. Having a consistent ideology could develop a better sense of personal & communal identities, but it also contributes to affective polarization (Lelkes 2022). Affective polarization involves the emotional discrimination that individuals hold and express for their opposing groups (Iyengar et al. 2019). Mason (2018) explains that such a disparity in diverging political groups cultivates increased in-group favouritism & out-group hostility, group identification, resentment, and shunning, which are inimical to one’s mental health. Nelson (2022) also conveyed that affective polarization has a significant interconnection with poorer self-rated health quo, considering the psychological toll of political animosity often overrides beneficial political engagement. In addition to this, more ideologically committed political parties may also experience more psychological distress in the face of opposing views (Fraser et al., 2022). Political polarization can fall unequally on individuals depending on ideological positions. The conservatives, usually prioritizing lower-systemic engagement, may not accept when social transformations impose development on intersectional communities (Jost et al., 2018). Liberals, on the other hand, advocate for better democracies, would feel frustrated when governmental policies fail to facilitate equality (Napier & Jost, 2008). Individuals with mixed views often struggling with belonging and community may feel alienation under the polarized political climate. Such alienation results in a lack of purpose and a state of powerlessness for the common man in politics, further affecting an individual’s mental health. PP is no longer limited to political debates and partisan elections but is increasingly penetrating dynamics in the workforce and interpersonally, affecting individual psychological function. Still, very little research has been used to extend these observations to the medical school context, where students are subjected to repeated stress, ethical concerns, and identity development in the face of intense academic pressure. It is thus an important but yet to be explored research area to know how political polarization interplays with the psychosocial functioning and the mental health of medical students. In medical students, ideological consistency can strengthen rigid thinking, enhance perceptions of threat from dissimilar others, and magnify affective conflict in debates of politicized medical issues like reproductive health, vaccine policies, or health care reform. Beyond this, ideologically consistent individuals may perceive more emotional labour in mixed political, social, clinical, and educational spaces, to the detriment of their psychological well-being. Ideological incoherence or moderation, while arguably more cognitively demanding, may function as a buffer against stress via improved cognitive flexibility and empathy (Federico & Hunt, 2011). These dynamics can affect not only their peer relationships but also their developing professional identities, their regard for ethics, and their attitude towards institutional impartiality for medical students. Even as there has been increased scholarly interest in the psychological impact of political polarization, there remains a major empirical chasm regarding its impact on medical students. Much of the current research has been conducted among general or politically active populations and with insufficient regard to how the specific psychosocial stressors of medical education interact with political stress. Despite the growing research that correlates political polarization with harmful psychological effects, there is still a major empirical gap in systematically examining the mechanisms through which polarization influences well-being across different dimensions. Much research available identifies general associations between political fragmentation and reported stress (Fraser et al., 2022) and anxiety (Nelson, 2022), but few explore the mediating or modulating influences of variables such as resilience, social connections, or identity salience. This study seeks to understand the gap by exploring the interplay between the ideological consistency in political orientation and personal well-being among heterogeneous sample. This research is grounded in the hypothesis that extreme ideological positions may limit social flexibility among students and might foster identity based conflict, compromising personal well- being. To fetch a much more comprehensive understanding, the study also explores whether demographic factors such as socioeconomic status, sexual orientation, family structure and geographical factors moderate these relationships. METHODS Participants The study aimed to observe the association between ideological consistency in political polarization and personal well-being among 1,023 undergraduate medical students. The sample comprised both males (n = 459) and females (n = 535) from various socio economic status, sexual orientations and family structures. The stratified sampling technique utilized ensured the balances representation across the demographic variables. Measures Participants completed the data through institutions and social networks by taking informed consent prior to participation of this study. Anonymity and confidentiality were assured throughout the study. Ethical approval was obtained from the institutional research committee. Data Analysis The self-report questionnaires: the Ideological Consistency Scale (ICS) (Pew Research Centre, 2014) and Personal Well-being Index (PWI) (Lau et al., 2005) was utilized. The collected data were analysed using descriptive statistics, chi-square analysis, Mann-Whitney U test were used for non- parametric comparisons between the groups. Spearman’s rho was used to analyse correlation between ideological consistency and personal well-being. All analysis is set to the significance set at p < .05. RESULTS In a sample of 1023 undergraduate medical students, the median age is 21 years, with an IQR of 2 years. The youngest and oldest participants were aged 18 and 25 years, respectively. Females comprised the majority of the sample, with 550 participants (53.76%), while male participants numbered 473 (46.24%) (from Fig. 1 ). Table 1 Descriptive Statistics for Ideological Consistency in Political Polarisation and Personal Well-being Study Parameters N Median IQR Min. Max. W p Ideological Consistency 1023 1 5.00 -10 10 0.984 < .001 Personal Well-being 1023 56 29.00 13 100 0.938 < .001 Table: 1 shows the Normality testing of the Ideological Consistency ( W = 0.984, p < .001) & Personal Well-being ( W = 0.938, p < .001) scores explains that the data distribution is significantly subjected to non-normality, reinforcing the use of non-parametric tests for further analyses. Descriptive statistics across 1023 undergrad medical students reveal that ideological consistency has a median score of 1 with an IQR of 5, scores ranging from − 10 to + 10. Personal well-being has a median score of 56 and an IQR of 29, with the lowest and the highest scores being 13 and 100, respectively. Table 2 Demographics Characteristics of the Participants Demographic Variables Group Sample Total Chi ( χ²) df p-value Female Male SES Upper Class 151 135 286 3.19 2 0.203 Upper Middle Class 358 289 647 Lower Middle Class 41 49 90 Parent’s Occupation Doctors 196 189 385 5.45 5 0.363 Engineers 13 13 26 Civil Services 27 23 50 IT 82 75 157 Chartered Accountant 6 9 15 Business 226 164 390 Family Structure Nuclear 444 378 822 0.163 2 0.922 Extended 102 92 194 Separated 4 3 7 Place of Origin India 528 450 978 0.456 3 0.928 USA 17 18 35 UAE 1 1 2 Others 4 4 8 Locality Rural 25 16 41 3.80 2 0.149 Sub-Urban 34 43 77 Urban 491 414 950 Year of Study First 116 86 202 13.2* 4 0.010 Second 124 92 216 Third 104 122 226 Fourth 127 86 213 Fifth 79 87 166 Family with Political Affiliation Yes 15 14 29 0.0499 1 0.823 No 535 459 994 Sexual Orientation Homosexual 1 3 4 5.51 2 0.064 Heterosexual 541 454 995 Bisexual 8 16 24 Religious Affiliation Hinduism 458 379 827 3.71 4 0.447 Islam 36 31 67 Christianity 53 59 112 Jainism 2 1 3 Others 1 3 4 Political Polarization Consistently Conservative 22 9 31 12.2* 4 0.016 Mostly Conservative 126 114 240 Mixed 300 271 571 Mostly Liberal 75 71 146 Consistently Liberal 27 8 35 Subjective Well-being Normal 203 166 369 0.393 2 0.822 Compromised 148 133 281 Challenged 189 174 373 Note: *p < 0.05 (significant) Table- 2 shows the demographic characteristics of the participants reveal that the majority of the sample are: females (53.76%); upper middle class (63.24%); with business as parents’ occupation (38.12%); nuclear families (80.35%); with Indian origin (95.76%), urban localities (92.86%); third year students (22.09%); families with no political affiliation (97.16%); heterosexual (97.26%); Hindus (80.84%); with mixed political views (55.81%) and with challenged subjective well-being (36.46%). Significant gender distribution disparities are noticed in participants’ years of study (χ² = 13.2, df = 4, p = .010) and their political polarization (χ² = 12.2, df = 4, p = .016). On the whole, the distribution of the demographic variables shows high consistency and very few gender-based differences across the other variables, with great sample homogeneity. Table 3 Differences in Families with Political Affiliation across Ideological Consistency in Political Polarisation and Personal Well-being Study Parameters Yes No U p Median IQR Median IQR Ideological Consistency 2 4.00 1 5.00 12087 0.932 Personal well-being 45 10.00 56 29.75 9819 0.002 Note. Hₐ µ Yes < µ No Table 3 depicts the data of comparisons in families with political affiliation across the scores of ideological consistency revealed no significant differences ( U = 12087, p = .932). While for personal well-being ( U = 9819, p = .002), participants from families with no political affiliation (Median = 45, IQR = 10.00) reported better well-being than those who came from families with political affiliation (Median = 56, IQR = 29.75), Table 4.1 Differences in Locality across Ideological Consistency in Political Polarisation and Personal Well-being Study Parameters χ² df P Ideological Consistency 5.42 2 0.067 Personal Well-being 18.78 2 <.001 Table 4.2 Pair wise comparison of demographic levels in Participants’ Locality with discrepancies in Personal Well-being Locality: Rural, sub-urban, and urban Personal Well-being W p Rural Sub-Urban – 5.19 <.001 Rural Urban – 5.92 <.001 Table 4.1 & 4.2 shows the analyses on participants’ locality. It revealed significant differences across personal well-being (χ² (2) = 18.78, p < .001), where participants from rural areas presented lower well-being than their urban ( W = 5.92, p < .001) and suburban areas ( W = 5.19, p < .001). Differences in Ideological Consistency did not approach significance ( χ² (2) = 5.42, p = .067). Table 5.1 Differences in Sexual Orientation across Ideological Consistency in Political Polarisation and Personal Well-being Study Parameters χ² df p Ideological Consistency 1.50 2 0.472 Personal Well-being 9.73 2 0.008 Table 5.2 Pair wise comparison of demographic levels in Participants’ Sexual Orientation with discrepancies in Personal Well-being Sexual Orientation: Heterosexual, homosexual, and bisexual Personal Well-being W p Bisexual Heterosexual – 4.392 0.005 Table 5.1 and 5.2 indicates the personal well-being scores were seen with a significant difference across participants’ sexual orientation ( χ² (2) = 9.73, p = .008). , where bisexual participants reported lower personal well-being than their heterosexual counterparts ( W = –4.392, p = .005). No significant differences were observed in ideological consistency ( χ² (2) = 1.50, p = .472). Table 6.1 Differences in Subjective Well-being across Ideological Consistency in Political Polarisation Study Parameters χ² df p Ideological Consistency 9.61 2 0.008 Table 6.2 Pair wise comparison of demographic levels in Participants’ Sexual Orientation with discrepancies in Ideological Consistency Subjective Well-being: Normal, compromised, and challenged Ideological Consistency W p Compromised Challenged 4.64 0.003 Table 6.1 and 6.2 shows the significant differences were found across the levels of subjective well-being in the scores of Ideological Consistency ( χ² (2) = 9.61, p = .008), where participants with compromised well-being showed higher scores than individuals with challenged well-being ( W = 4.64, p = .003). Table 7 Relationship between Ideological Consistency in Political Polarisation and Personal Well-being Study Parameters Ideological Consistency Personal Well-being Spearman's rho – 0.453* df 1021 p-value 0.006 Note. * p < .05 Table 7 shows the significant negative correlation (ρ (1021) = –.453, p = .006) observed between ideological consistency and personal well-being; individuals with conservative political views reported lower well-being. DISCUSSION The present study analysed the interrelation of IC in political polarisation and personal well-being among 1023 undergraduate medical students, control for various demographic factors including family political background, locality, and sexual orientation. The findings reveal how rigidity in politics interfaces with the students’ mental health as well as with social variables in general. The key finding is a statistically significant but small inverse correlation of Ideological consistency with PW (ρ = − 0.453, p = .006). Even if ideological consistency can provide cognitive organisation with a sense of clarity, Jost et al (2018) noted that consistency of this nature is correlated with psychological traits of dogmatism, need for closure, and intolerance of ambiguity. These characteristics might be related to reduce emotional well-being, especially if the respective individuals have to face psychological stressors. Also, Napier & Jost (2008); Federico & Hunt. (2011) observed that individuals who adopt extreme or unwavering political positions often do experience heightened psychological distress due to reduced cognitive flexibility, social conflict and a perceived lack of control. These results were echoed in those of Kanovský and Kocičová (2018), where they established that consistency in ideologies was not common across people. Similarly, to the current research, the outcomes indicate that highly consistent ideological stances are not common and can be an indication of political inflexibility that can differ across student populations. Federico and Hunt (2011) also noted that ideological consistency was stronger in people who were highly politicized and possessed more polarized partisan attitudes, meaning such consistency is usually determined by personal engagement and political motivation, which can significantly differ in a population of students. Accounting for the fact that Ideological consistency and Personal well-being are not normally distributed, non-parametric testing was conducted for more suitable statistical analysis. Ideological consistency was measured with a median value of 1 (IQR = 5.00), whereas Personal well-being was more dispersed (Median = 56, IQR = 29.75), indicating a wide range of experiences of mental well-being across a student population. The demographic profile revealed complex trends. While there were no significant differences across the majority of the background variables by gender, there were significant differences corresponding to years of study (χ² = 13.2, p = .010) and political polarization (χ² = 12.2, p = .016). This is in support of the fact that political views and progression according to education vary by gender, potentially due to social role and identity formation in young adult life. This is in agreement with the previous research of Burns et al. (2009), identifying that political engagement is influenced by the type of experiences that occur in institutions like the family and workplace. Similarly, Coffé and Bolzendahl (2010) found notable gender gaps in certain forms of political participation, even across diverse sociocultural contexts. The same pattern was noted by Ballard, Ni, and Brocato (2020), who established that conventional political behaviours were weakly positive correlates of well-being in college students. This highlights the idea that some types of political engagement, especially those of emotional intensity, may correlate with reduced well-being in youthful populations. Rural location was also a key predictor, where rural students reported lower well-being compared to suburban and urban students. This is in line with the conclusion of Hartley (2004) that rural communities commonly experience poor access to health care and increased psychological stress as a result of isolation, lower levels of education, and financial disadvantage. Sexual orientation was a significant predictor of well-being. Bisexual participants scored significantly lower in well-being than heterosexual participants (W = − 4.392, p = .005). This result is in line with Meyer’s (2003) minority stress theory, which predicts that sexual minority members experience chronic stress due to stigma in the social world, resulting in poor health outcomes. To these conclusions, the data also provided insights that Ideological consistency was differentially related to subjective well-being status. Students with compromised well-being were significantly more ideologically rigid than those with challenged well-being (W = 4.64, p = .003). This is perhaps indicative of more general psychological processes associated with well-being. Those with lower subjective well-being might be more susceptible to rigid Ideological systems. The Need for Cognitive Closure theory (Kruglanski & Webster, 1996) would propose that lower well-being would create an enhanced need for firm beliefs to alleviate uncertainty. Social Identity Theory (Tajfel & Turner, 2004) would assert that ideological identification gives people a sense of belonging and meaning in times of low personal well-being. Combined, these theories propose that ideological rigidity is a result of cognitive and identity requirements related to lower well-being. Expanding on this, the results suggest students with higher ideological rigidity might also score lower on personal well-being. This dynamic is especially pertinent for rural and marginalized community students, where firm political views can act as psychological anchor points. This observation highlights the necessity for mental health practitioners to take the emotional effects of political polarization into account and to promote open discussion and flexible thought as part of student well-being strategies. Implications These study findings suggest a strong need for the mental health interventions that promote ideological openness and cognitive flexibility, especially in politically charged environments. Educational institutes might play a pivotal role in developing critical thinking and prompting respectful dialogue across ideological divides. Tailored policy efforts to address the unique needs of marginalized groups, especially bisexual individuals and rural populations appears to be vulnerable to emotional toll of political rigidity. The study supports Sustainable Development Goal 10 (Reduced Inequalities) and Goal 3 (Good Health and Well-Being) by revealing how personal well-being varies across ideological consistency, rural background, and sexual orientation. Limitations and Future Directions This study employed a cross sectional design, which limits the causal inference. Self- report measures might have introduced bias and cultural differences among participants from diverse countries were not included. In future this study can be carried as longitudinal design by incorporating interviews also by exploring neurocognitive correlates of ideological rigidity. Conclusion The results of this study show a relatively small but statistically significant inverse correlation between undergraduate medical students’ Personal well-being and Ideological consistency, revealing a complex relationship. Ideological consistency may promote mental clarity, but it is also associated with psychological characteristics like dogmatism and intolerance for ambiguity, which can have a negative impact on well-being, especially when under stress. These dynamics are exacerbated by demographic factors, including sexual orientation, year of study, and rural location; bisexual and rural students report much lower levels of well-being. Rigid ideological convictions may be a coping method for those with reduced well-being, as explained by theoretical frameworks like the Need for Cognitive Closure and Social Identity theory. These revelations highlight how crucial it is to address political stubbornness as a component of comprehensive mental health interventions. Particularly for students from underprivileged or stressful backgrounds, interventions that encourage cognitive flexibility and inclusive discourse may improve psychological effects and improve students’ well-being in academic circumstances. Abbreviations • ICS • PWI-A • PP • PW Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate: This study involved human participants and was reviewed and approved by Sri Rmachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research- (DU), Porur, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India . Institutional Ethics Committee (reference: ID CSP/23/JUL/131/572). The research was conducted according to the ethical principles of the Helsinki Declaration. Also, written informed consent was obtained from all participants, their right to withdraw at any time without penalty, and the purpose of the study. All the data were anonymized, and confidentiality was maintained. The study procedures involved limited risks, and no harm was anticipated or reported. Consent for publication Not Applicable Availability of data and materials: The data set supporting the findings of this study is not publicly available due to the involvement of a student population and associated confidentiality concerns. However, the data can be made available by the corresponding author upon reasonable request for academic or research purposes. Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Funding: Self- funded. Authors’ contributions Authors AJ & DS contributed to the initial conceptualization and perception of the first manuscript draft, MHV & SS assisted in the preliminary drafting process, DD & VP were responsible for the statistical analysis, RPD contributed to the final editing of manuscript. Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank all the participants for their valuable time and cooperation during the study. We also extend our sincere gratitude to the supporting institutions and individuals who facilitated data collections and provided the necessary resources. References Ballard PJ, Ni X, Brocato N. Political engagement and well-being among college students. J Appl Dev Psychol. 2020;71:101209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2020.101209 . Burns N, Schlozman KL, Verba S. The private roots of public action: Gender, equality, and political participation. Harvard University Press; 2009. Chen MK, Rohla R. The effect of partisanship and political advertising on close family ties. Science. 2018;360(6392):1020–4. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaq1433 . Coffe H, Bolzendahl C. Gender gaps in political participation across Sub-Saharan African nations. Soc Indic Res. 2010;102(2):245–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-010-9676-6 . Federico CM, Hunt CV. Political information, political involvement, and reliance on ideology in political evaluation. Polit Behav. 2011;35(1):89–112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-011-9184-7 . Fraser T, Aldrich DP, Panagopoulos C, Hummel D, Kim D. The harmful effects of partisan polarization on health. PNAS Nexus. 2022;1(1):pgac011. https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgac011 . Hartley D. Rural health disparities, population health, and rural culture. Am J Public Health. 2004;94(10):1675–8. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.94.10.1675 . Iyengar S, Lelkes Y, Levendusky M, Malhotra N, Westwood SJ. The origins and consequences of affective polarization in the United States. Annu Rev Polit Sci. 2019;22:129–46. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051117-073034 . Jost JT, Glaser J, Sulloway FJ, Kruglanski AW. (2018). Political conservatism is motivated social cognition. In Routledge eBooks (pp. 129–204). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315175867-5 Kanovský M, Kocičová N. Ideological consistency and political polarization in Slovakia. Hum Affairs. 2018;28(1):44–53. https://doi.org/10.1515/humaff-2018-0005 . Kruglanski AW, Webster DM. Motivated closing of the mind: Seizing and freezing. Psychol Rev. 1996;103(2):263–83. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.103.2.263 . Lau ALD, Cummins RA, McPherson W. An Investigation into the Cross-Cultural Equivalence of the Personal Wellbeing Index. Soc Indic Res. 2005;72(3):403–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-004-0561-z . Lelkes Y. Ideological congruence and political tolerance. Pub Opin Q. 2022;86(2):317–40. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfac014 . Mason L. Uncivil agreement: How politics became our identity. University of Chicago Press; 2018. Meyer IH. Prejudice, social stress, and mental health in lesbian, gay, and bisexual populations: Conceptual issues and research evidence. Psychol Bull. 2003;129(5):674–97. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.5.674 . Napier JL, Jost JT. Why are conservatives happier than liberals? Psychol Sci. 2008;19(6):565–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02124.x . Nelson MH. Resentment is like drinking poison? The heterogeneous health effects of affective polarization. J Health Soc Behav. 2022;63(4):508–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/00221465221075311 . Pew Research Center. (2014). Political polarization in the American public . https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2014/06/12/political-polarization-in-the-american-public/ Tajfel H, Turner JC. (2004). The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behavior. In Political Psychology (pp. 276–293). https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203505984-16 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-7091567","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":491829495,"identity":"8a443d73-9588-4513-a3fb-3eb8ca1228cb","order_by":0,"name":"Adit Parerikkal Jeyan","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Adit","middleName":"Parerikkal","lastName":"Jeyan","suffix":""},{"id":491829497,"identity":"0fadec30-5484-42f6-86b6-c7d2994d0d11","order_by":1,"name":"Dhansree Sarangamurali","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Dhansree","middleName":"","lastName":"Sarangamurali","suffix":""},{"id":491829498,"identity":"258dd6b7-1a5b-4dad-8606-183bbf4f61bb","order_by":2,"name":"Madhavan H Varadarajan","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Madhavan","middleName":"H","lastName":"Varadarajan","suffix":""},{"id":491829499,"identity":"263e9427-7400-4186-8c58-65ba4a61b939","order_by":3,"name":"Srishakthi Venkataraman","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Srishakthi","middleName":"","lastName":"Venkataraman","suffix":""},{"id":491829500,"identity":"773ef115-a8ee-4963-8aad-0274cef7e9a3","order_by":4,"name":"Durga Rangaswamy Pandian","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Durga","middleName":"Rangaswamy","lastName":"Pandian","suffix":""},{"id":491829502,"identity":"c9a76ca0-d333-43a6-981f-1b4c0a354e85","order_by":5,"name":"Vijayalakshmi Purusothaman","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Vijayalakshmi","middleName":"","lastName":"Purusothaman","suffix":""},{"id":491829503,"identity":"8317f7f2-5de4-4154-aff8-d403225dd23e","order_by":6,"name":"Darshini Madanagopal","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Darshini","middleName":"","lastName":"Madanagopal","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-07-10 09:53:18","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7091567/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7091567/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":87936558,"identity":"05ab0b3e-75bc-4e9f-9495-449ec49a9a46","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-07-30 14:30:53","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":19958,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eGender Distribution of the Participants\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7091567/v1/93d01d48b51be08ff629cf80.png"},{"id":91499606,"identity":"0635c0f6-131b-4315-b416-4f6e38dad130","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-17 07:09:14","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":911145,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7091567/v1/5b93f112-713e-45b6-9430-dc14778a9ebd.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"\u003cp\u003ePolarized Minds: Exploring the Link between Ideological Consistency and Personal Well-Being among Medical Students\u003c/p\u003e","fulltext":[{"header":"INTRODUCTION","content":"\u003cp\u003ePolitical polarity (PP) refers to skewedness an individual holds in their political views, typically away from centralised political ideologies. Throughout history, political polarization has led to activism, advocacy for rights, and conflicts between opposing political groups. However, in modern times, the intensifications of political debates have deepened ideological divisions creating animosity between different groups.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eUnsolicited exposure to polarised political groups among vulnerable populations, such as students or young adults, may pose latent negative schemata or affect, owing to modern democratic settings.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eObserving the crux of Western Politics gives us a picture of two significantly distinct divisions, i.e., conservatives and liberals. Conservatives raise their support for binding values such as free-market principles, limited government intervention, and moral absolutism, carrying traditional connotations. On the other side of the spectrum, liberals try to promote individualizing values such as fairness in authority, abolishing social inequalities, and progressive reforms in socio-political issues. In addition, a multitude of individuals holds mixed or moderate ideologies, having centralised standpoints across the spectrum.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIntensified polarization in politics may manifest effects on an individual\u0026rsquo;s well-being. Fraser et al. (2022) reveal through their studies that higher levels of ideological polarization in politics plausibly lead to more adverse psychological outcomes, such as anxiety, depression, and sleep disorders. Nelson (2022) concludes that even mere exposure to politically charged content continuously might worsen these mental health concerns by generating echo chambers, which maintain the pre-existing views and escalating aversion towards opposing political groups. Furthermore, Chen \u0026amp; Rohla (2018) discussed the profound impact that political disagreements can have on personal relationships and social well-being.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIdeological consistency (IC) can be explained as the congruence of an individual's beliefs and viewpoints across various political issues. Having a consistent ideology could develop a better sense of personal \u0026amp; communal identities, but it also contributes to affective polarization (Lelkes 2022). Affective polarization involves the emotional discrimination that individuals hold and express for their opposing groups (Iyengar et al. 2019).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMason (2018) explains that such a disparity in diverging political groups cultivates increased in-group favouritism \u0026amp; out-group hostility, group identification, resentment, and shunning, which are inimical to one\u0026rsquo;s mental health. Nelson (2022) also conveyed that affective polarization has a significant interconnection with poorer self-rated health quo, considering the psychological toll of political animosity often overrides beneficial political engagement. In addition to this, more ideologically committed political parties may also experience more psychological distress in the face of opposing views (Fraser et al., 2022).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePolitical polarization can fall unequally on individuals depending on ideological positions. The conservatives, usually prioritizing lower-systemic engagement, may not accept when social transformations impose development on intersectional communities (Jost et al., 2018). Liberals, on the other hand, advocate for better democracies, would feel frustrated when governmental policies fail to facilitate equality (Napier \u0026amp; Jost, 2008). Individuals with mixed views often struggling with belonging and community may feel alienation under the polarized political climate. Such alienation results in a lack of purpose and a state of powerlessness for the common man in politics, further affecting an individual\u0026rsquo;s mental health.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePP is no longer limited to political debates and partisan elections but is increasingly penetrating dynamics in the workforce and interpersonally, affecting individual psychological function. Still, very little research has been used to extend these observations to the medical school context, where students are subjected to repeated stress, ethical concerns, and identity development in the face of intense academic pressure. It is thus an important but yet to be explored research area to know how political polarization interplays with the psychosocial functioning and the mental health of medical students.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn medical students, ideological consistency can strengthen rigid thinking, enhance perceptions of threat from dissimilar others, and magnify affective conflict in debates of politicized medical issues like reproductive health, vaccine policies, or health care reform. Beyond this, ideologically consistent individuals may perceive more emotional labour in mixed political, social, clinical, and educational spaces, to the detriment of their psychological well-being. Ideological incoherence or moderation, while arguably more cognitively demanding, may function as a buffer against stress via improved cognitive flexibility and empathy (Federico \u0026amp; Hunt, 2011).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThese dynamics can affect not only their peer relationships but also their developing professional identities, their regard for ethics, and their attitude towards institutional impartiality for medical students. Even as there has been increased scholarly interest in the psychological impact of political polarization, there remains a major empirical chasm regarding its impact on medical students. Much of the current research has been conducted among general or politically active populations and with insufficient regard to how the specific psychosocial stressors of medical education interact with political stress.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDespite the growing research that correlates political polarization with harmful psychological effects, there is still a major empirical gap in systematically examining the mechanisms through which polarization influences well-being across different dimensions. Much research available identifies general associations between political fragmentation and reported stress (Fraser et al., 2022) and anxiety (Nelson, 2022), but few explore the mediating or modulating influences of variables such as resilience, social connections, or identity salience.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study seeks to understand the gap by exploring the interplay between the ideological consistency in political orientation and personal well-being among heterogeneous sample. This research is grounded in the hypothesis that extreme ideological positions may limit social flexibility among students and might foster identity based conflict, compromising personal well- being.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo fetch a much more comprehensive understanding, the study also explores whether demographic factors such as socioeconomic status, sexual orientation, family structure and geographical factors moderate these relationships.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"METHODS","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eParticipants\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study aimed to observe the association between ideological consistency in political polarization and personal well-being among 1,023 undergraduate medical students. The sample comprised both males (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;459) and females (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;535) from various socio economic status, sexual orientations and family structures. The stratified sampling technique utilized ensured the balances representation across the demographic variables.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eMeasures\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e Participants completed the data through institutions and social networks by taking informed consent prior to participation of this study. Anonymity and confidentiality were assured throughout the study. Ethical approval was obtained from the institutional research committee.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec2\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eData Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe self-report questionnaires: the Ideological Consistency Scale (ICS) (Pew Research Centre, 2014) and Personal Well-being Index (PWI) (Lau et al., 2005) was utilized. The collected data were analysed using descriptive statistics, chi-square analysis, Mann-Whitney U test were used for non- parametric comparisons between the groups. Spearman\u0026rsquo;s rho was used to analyse correlation between ideological consistency and personal well-being. All analysis is set to the significance set at p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.05.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"RESULTS","content":"\u003cp\u003eIn a sample of 1023 undergraduate medical students, the median age is 21 years, with an IQR of 2 years. The youngest and oldest participants were aged 18 and 25 years, respectively. Females comprised the majority of the sample, with 550 participants (53.76%), while male participants numbered 473 (46.24%) (from Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDescriptive Statistics for Ideological Consistency in Political Polarisation and Personal Well-being\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"8\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eStudy Parameters\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eN\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eMedian\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIQR\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eMin.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eMax.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eW\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eIdeological Consistency\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1023\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e5.00\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-10\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.984\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePersonal Well-being\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1023\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e56\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e29.00\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e13\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e100\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.938\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTable: 1 shows the Normality testing of the Ideological Consistency (\u003cem\u003eW\u0026thinsp;=\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;0.984, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001) \u0026amp; Personal Well-being (\u003cem\u003eW\u0026thinsp;=\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;0.938, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001) scores explains that the data distribution is significantly subjected to non-normality, reinforcing the use of non-parametric tests for further analyses. Descriptive statistics across 1023 undergrad medical students reveal that ideological consistency has a median score of 1 with an IQR of 5, scores ranging from \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;10 to +\u0026thinsp;10. Personal well-being has a median score of 56 and an IQR of 29, with the lowest and the highest scores being 13 and 100, respectively.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDemographics Characteristics of the Participants\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"10\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c9\" colnum=\"9\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c10\" colnum=\"10\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDemographic Variables\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eGroup\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSample\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eChi ( χ\u0026sup2;)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003edf\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ep-value\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSES\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eUpper Class\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e151\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e135\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e286\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.19\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.203\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eUpper Middle Class\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e358\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e289\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e647\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLower Middle Class\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e41\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e49\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e90\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"5\" rowspan=\"6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eParent\u0026rsquo;s Occupation\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDoctors\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e196\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e189\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e385\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\" morerows=\"5\" rowspan=\"6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e5.45\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\" morerows=\"5\" rowspan=\"6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\" morerows=\"5\" rowspan=\"6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.363\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eEngineers\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e13\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e13\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e26\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eCivil Services\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e27\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e23\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e50\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eIT\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e82\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e75\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e157\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eChartered Accountant\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBusiness\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e226\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e164\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e390\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFamily Structure\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eNuclear\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e444\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e378\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e822\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.163\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.922\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eExtended\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e102\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e92\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e194\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSeparated\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"3\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePlace of Origin\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eIndia\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e528\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e450\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e978\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\" morerows=\"3\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.456\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\" morerows=\"3\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\" morerows=\"3\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.928\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eUSA\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e17\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e18\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e35\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eUAE\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eOthers\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLocality\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eRural\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e25\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e16\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e41\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.80\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.149\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSub-Urban\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e34\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e43\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e77\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eUrban\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e491\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e414\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e950\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"4\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eYear of Study\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFirst\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e116\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e86\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e202\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\" morerows=\"4\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e13.2*\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\" morerows=\"4\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\" morerows=\"4\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.010\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSecond\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e124\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e92\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e216\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eThird\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e104\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e122\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e226\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFourth\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e127\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e86\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e213\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFifth\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e79\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e87\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e166\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFamily with Political Affiliation\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e14\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e29\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.0499\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.823\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e535\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e459\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e994\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSexual Orientation\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHomosexual\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e5.51\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.064\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHeterosexual\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e541\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e454\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e995\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBisexual\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e16\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e24\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"4\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eReligious Affiliation\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHinduism\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e458\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e379\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e827\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\" morerows=\"4\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.71\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\" morerows=\"4\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\" morerows=\"4\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.447\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eIslam\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e36\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e31\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e67\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eChristianity\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e53\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e59\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e112\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eJainism\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eOthers\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"4\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePolitical Polarization\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eConsistently Conservative\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e22\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e31\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\" morerows=\"4\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e12.2*\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\" morerows=\"4\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\" morerows=\"4\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.016\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMostly Conservative\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e126\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e114\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e240\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMixed\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e300\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e271\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e571\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMostly Liberal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e75\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e71\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e146\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eConsistently Liberal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e27\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e35\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSubjective Well-being\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eNormal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e203\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e166\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e369\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.393\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.822\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eCompromised\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e148\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e133\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e281\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eChallenged\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e189\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e174\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e373\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003ctfoot\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"10\"\u003eNote: *p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05 (significant)\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tfoot\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTable- 2 shows the demographic characteristics of the participants reveal that the majority of the sample are: females (53.76%); upper middle class (63.24%); with business as parents\u0026rsquo; occupation (38.12%); nuclear families (80.35%); with Indian origin (95.76%), urban localities (92.86%); third year students (22.09%); families with no political affiliation (97.16%); heterosexual (97.26%); Hindus (80.84%); with mixed political views (55.81%) and with challenged subjective well-being (36.46%). Significant gender distribution disparities are noticed in participants\u0026rsquo; years of study (χ\u0026sup2; = 13.2, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.010) and their political polarization (χ\u0026sup2; = 12.2, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.016). On the whole, the distribution of the demographic variables shows high consistency and very few gender-based differences across the other variables, with great sample homogeneity.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDifferences in Families with Political Affiliation across Ideological Consistency in Political Polarisation and Personal Well-being\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"7\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eStudy Parameters\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eU\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eMedian\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIQR\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eMedian\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIQR\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eIdeological Consistency\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4.00\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e5.00\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e12087\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.932\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePersonal well-being\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e45\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e10.00\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e56\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e29.75\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e9819\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.002\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"7\" nameend=\"c7\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote.\u003c/em\u003e Hₐ \u0026micro;\u003csub\u003eYes\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;\u0026micro;\u003csub\u003eNo\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e depicts the data of comparisons in families with political affiliation across the scores of ideological consistency revealed no significant differences (\u003cem\u003eU\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;12087, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.932). While for personal well-being (\u003cem\u003eU\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;9819, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.002), participants from families with no political affiliation (Median\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;45, IQR\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;10.00) reported better well-being than those who came from families with political affiliation (Median\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;56, IQR\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;29.75),\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 4.1\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003eDifferences in Locality across Ideological Consistency in Political Polarisation and Personal Well-being\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStudy Parameters\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026chi;\u0026sup2;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003edf\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIdeological Consistency\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.42\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.067\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePersonal Well-being\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e18.78\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;.001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 4.2\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003ePair wise comparison of demographic levels in Participants\u0026rsquo; Locality with discrepancies in Personal Well-being\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eLocality: Rural, sub-urban, and urban\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePersonal Well-being\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eW\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRural\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSub-Urban\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026ndash; 5.19\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;.001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRural\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUrban\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026ndash; 5.92\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;.001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 4.1 \u0026amp; 4.2 shows the analyses on participants\u0026rsquo; locality. It revealed significant differences across personal well-being (\u0026chi;\u0026sup2; (2) = 18.78, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001), where participants from rural areas presented lower well-being than their urban (\u003cem\u003eW\u003c/em\u003e = 5.92, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001) and suburban areas (\u003cem\u003eW\u003c/em\u003e = 5.19, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001). Differences in Ideological Consistency did not approach significance (\u003cem\u003e\u0026chi;\u0026sup2;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(2) = 5.42, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .067).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 5.1\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003eDifferences in Sexual Orientation across Ideological Consistency in Political Polarisation and Personal Well-being\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStudy Parameters\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026chi;\u0026sup2;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003edf\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIdeological Consistency\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.472\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePersonal Well-being\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.73\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.008\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 5.2\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003ePair wise comparison of demographic levels in Participants\u0026rsquo; Sexual Orientation with discrepancies in Personal Well-being\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSexual Orientation: Heterosexual, homosexual, and bisexual\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePersonal Well-being\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eW\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBisexual\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHeterosexual\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026ndash; 4.392\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.005\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 5.1 and 5.2 indicates the personal well-being scores were seen with a significant difference across participants\u0026rsquo; sexual orientation (\u003cem\u003e\u0026chi;\u0026sup2;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(2) = 9.73, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .008). \u0026nbsp;, where bisexual participants reported lower personal well-being than their heterosexual counterparts (\u003cem\u003eW\u003c/em\u003e = \u0026ndash;4.392, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .005). No significant differences were observed in ideological consistency (\u003cem\u003e\u0026chi;\u0026sup2;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(2) = 1.50, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .472).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 6.1\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003eDifferences in Subjective Well-being across Ideological Consistency in Political Polarisation\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStudy Parameters\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026chi;\u0026sup2;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003edf\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIdeological Consistency\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.61\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.008\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 6.2\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003ePair wise comparison of demographic levels in Participants\u0026rsquo; Sexual Orientation with discrepancies in Ideological Consistency\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSubjective Well-being:\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003eNormal, compromised, and challenged\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eIdeological Consistency\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eW\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCompromised\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eChallenged\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.64\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.003\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 6.1 and 6.2 shows the significant differences were found across the levels of subjective well-being in the scores of Ideological Consistency (\u003cem\u003e\u0026chi;\u0026sup2;\u003c/em\u003e(2) = 9.61, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .008), where participants with compromised well-being showed higher scores than individuals with challenged well-being (\u003cem\u003eW\u003c/em\u003e = 4.64, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .003).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 7\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003eRelationship between Ideological Consistency in Political Polarisation and Personal Well-being\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStudy Parameters\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIdeological Consistency\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePersonal Well-being\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSpearman\u0026apos;s rho\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026ndash; 0.453*\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003edf\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1021\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ep-value\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.006\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote. * p \u0026lt; .05\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 7 shows the significant negative correlation (\u0026rho; (1021) = \u0026ndash;.453, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .006) observed between ideological consistency and personal well-being; individuals with conservative political views reported lower well-being.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"DISCUSSION","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe present study analysed the interrelation of IC in political polarisation and personal well-being among 1023 undergraduate medical students, control for various demographic factors including family political background, locality, and sexual orientation. The findings reveal how rigidity in politics interfaces with the students\u0026rsquo; mental health as well as with social variables in general. The key finding is a statistically significant but small inverse correlation of Ideological consistency with PW (ρ = \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.453, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.006). Even if ideological consistency can provide cognitive organisation with a sense of clarity, Jost et al (2018) noted that consistency of this nature is correlated with psychological traits of dogmatism, need for closure, and intolerance of ambiguity. These characteristics might be related to reduce emotional well-being, especially if the respective individuals have to face psychological stressors. Also, Napier \u0026amp; Jost (2008); Federico \u0026amp; Hunt. (2011) observed that individuals who adopt extreme or unwavering political positions often do experience heightened psychological distress due to reduced cognitive flexibility, social conflict and a perceived lack of control.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThese results were echoed in those of Kanovsk\u0026yacute; and Kocičov\u0026aacute; (2018), where they established that consistency in ideologies was not common across people. Similarly, to the current research, the outcomes indicate that highly consistent ideological stances are not common and can be an indication of political inflexibility that can differ across student populations. Federico and Hunt (2011) also noted that ideological consistency was stronger in people who were highly politicized and possessed more polarized partisan attitudes, meaning such consistency is usually determined by personal engagement and political motivation, which can significantly differ in a population of students.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAccounting for the fact that Ideological consistency and Personal well-being are not normally distributed, non-parametric testing was conducted for more suitable statistical analysis. Ideological consistency was measured with a median value of 1 (IQR\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5.00), whereas Personal well-being was more dispersed (Median\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;56, IQR\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;29.75), indicating a wide range of experiences of mental well-being across a student population.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe demographic profile revealed complex trends. While there were no significant differences across the majority of the background variables by gender, there were significant differences corresponding to years of study (χ\u0026sup2; = 13.2, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.010) and political polarization (χ\u0026sup2; = 12.2, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.016). This is in support of the fact that political views and progression according to education vary by gender, potentially due to social role and identity formation in young adult life. This is in agreement with the previous research of Burns et al. (2009), identifying that political engagement is influenced by the type of experiences that occur in institutions like the family and workplace.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSimilarly, Coff\u0026eacute; and Bolzendahl (2010) found notable gender gaps in certain forms of political participation, even across diverse sociocultural contexts. The same pattern was noted by Ballard, Ni, and Brocato (2020), who established that conventional political behaviours were weakly positive correlates of well-being in college students. This highlights the idea that some types of political engagement, especially those of emotional intensity, may correlate with reduced well-being in youthful populations.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eRural location was also a key predictor, where rural students reported lower well-being compared to suburban and urban students. This is in line with the conclusion of Hartley (2004) that rural communities commonly experience poor access to health care and increased psychological stress as a result of isolation, lower levels of education, and financial disadvantage.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSexual orientation was a significant predictor of well-being. Bisexual participants scored significantly lower in well-being than heterosexual participants (W = \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;4.392, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.005). This result is in line with Meyer\u0026rsquo;s (2003) minority stress theory, which predicts that sexual minority members experience chronic stress due to stigma in the social world, resulting in poor health outcomes.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo these conclusions, the data also provided insights that Ideological consistency was differentially related to subjective well-being status. Students with compromised well-being were significantly more ideologically rigid than those with challenged well-being (W\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.64, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.003). This is perhaps indicative of more general psychological processes associated with well-being. Those with lower subjective well-being might be more susceptible to rigid Ideological systems. The Need for Cognitive Closure theory (Kruglanski \u0026amp; Webster, 1996) would propose that lower well-being would create an enhanced need for firm beliefs to alleviate uncertainty.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSocial Identity Theory (Tajfel \u0026amp; Turner, 2004) would assert that ideological identification gives people a sense of belonging and meaning in times of low personal well-being. Combined, these theories propose that ideological rigidity is a result of cognitive and identity requirements related to lower well-being. Expanding on this, the results suggest students with higher ideological rigidity might also score lower on personal well-being. This dynamic is especially pertinent for rural and marginalized community students, where firm political views can act as psychological anchor points. This observation highlights the necessity for mental health practitioners to take the emotional effects of political polarization into account and to promote open discussion and flexible thought as part of student well-being strategies.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eImplications\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThese study findings suggest a strong need for the mental health interventions that promote ideological openness and cognitive flexibility, especially in politically charged environments. Educational institutes might play a pivotal role in developing critical thinking and prompting respectful dialogue across ideological divides. Tailored policy efforts to address the unique needs of marginalized groups, especially bisexual individuals and rural populations appears to be vulnerable to emotional toll of political rigidity.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study supports Sustainable Development Goal 10 (Reduced Inequalities) and Goal 3 (Good Health and Well-Being) by revealing how personal well-being varies across ideological consistency, rural background, and sexual orientation.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLimitations and Future Directions\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study employed a cross sectional design, which limits the causal inference. Self- report measures might have introduced bias and cultural differences among participants from diverse countries were not included. In future this study can be carried as longitudinal design by incorporating interviews also by exploring neurocognitive correlates of ideological rigidity.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe results of this study show a relatively small but statistically significant inverse correlation between undergraduate medical students\u0026rsquo; Personal well-being and Ideological consistency, revealing a complex relationship. Ideological consistency may promote mental clarity, but it is also associated with psychological characteristics like dogmatism and intolerance for ambiguity, which can have a negative impact on well-being, especially when under stress. These dynamics are exacerbated by demographic factors, including sexual orientation, year of study, and rural location; bisexual and rural students report much lower levels of well-being.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRigid ideological convictions may be a coping method for those with reduced well-being, as explained by theoretical frameworks like the Need for Cognitive Closure and Social Identity theory. These revelations highlight how crucial it is to address political stubbornness as a component of comprehensive mental health interventions. Particularly for students from underprivileged or stressful backgrounds, interventions that encourage cognitive flexibility and inclusive discourse may improve psychological effects and improve students\u0026rsquo; well-being in academic circumstances.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Abbreviations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; ICS\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; PWI-A\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; PP\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; PW\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics approval and consent to participate:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eThis study involved human participants and was reviewed and approved by \u003cstrong\u003eSri Rmachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research- (DU), Porur, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India\u003c/strong\u003e. Institutional Ethics Committee (reference: ID CSP/23/JUL/131/572).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe research was conducted according to the ethical principles of the \u003cem\u003eHelsinki Declaration.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eAlso, written informed consent was obtained from all participants, their right to withdraw at any time without penalty, and the purpose of the study. All the data were anonymized, and confidentiality was maintained. The study procedures involved limited risks, and no harm was anticipated or reported.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent for publication\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNot Applicable\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAvailability of data and materials:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe data set supporting the findings of this study is not publicly available due to the involvement of a student population and associated confidentiality concerns. However, the data can be made available by the corresponding author upon reasonable request for academic or research purposes.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompeting Interests:\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare that they have no competing interests.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eSelf- funded.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthors\u0026rsquo; contributions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAuthors AJ \u0026amp; DS contributed to the initial conceptualization and perception of the first manuscript draft, MHV \u0026amp; SS assisted in the preliminary drafting process, DD \u0026amp; VP were responsible for the statistical analysis, RPD contributed to the final editing of manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgements\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors would like to thank all the participants for their valuable time and cooperation during the study. We also extend our sincere gratitude to the supporting institutions and individuals who facilitated data collections and provided the necessary resources.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBallard PJ, Ni X, Brocato N. Political engagement and well-being among college students. J Appl Dev Psychol. 2020;71:101209. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2020.101209\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.appdev.2020.101209\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBurns N, Schlozman KL, Verba S. The private roots of public action: Gender, equality, and political participation. Harvard University Press; 2009.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChen MK, Rohla R. The effect of partisanship and political advertising on close family ties. Science. 2018;360(6392):1020\u0026ndash;4. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaq1433\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1126/science.aaq1433\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCoffe H, Bolzendahl C. Gender gaps in political participation across Sub-Saharan African nations. Soc Indic Res. 2010;102(2):245\u0026ndash;64. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-010-9676-6\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11205-010-9676-6\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFederico CM, Hunt CV. Political information, political involvement, and reliance on ideology in political evaluation. Polit Behav. 2011;35(1):89\u0026ndash;112. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-011-9184-7\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11109-011-9184-7\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFraser T, Aldrich DP, Panagopoulos C, Hummel D, Kim D. The harmful effects of partisan polarization on health. PNAS Nexus. 2022;1(1):pgac011. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgac011\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1093/pnasnexus/pgac011\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHartley D. Rural health disparities, population health, and rural culture. Am J Public Health. 2004;94(10):1675\u0026ndash;8. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.94.10.1675\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.2105/AJPH.94.10.1675\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIyengar S, Lelkes Y, Levendusky M, Malhotra N, Westwood SJ. The origins and consequences of affective polarization in the United States. Annu Rev Polit Sci. 2019;22:129\u0026ndash;46. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051117-073034\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1146/annurev-polisci-051117-073034\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJost JT, Glaser J, Sulloway FJ, Kruglanski AW. (2018). Political conservatism is motivated social cognition. In Routledge eBooks (pp. 129\u0026ndash;204). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.4324/9781315175867-5\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.4324/9781315175867-5\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKanovsk\u0026yacute; M, Kocičov\u0026aacute; N. Ideological consistency and political polarization in Slovakia. Hum Affairs. 2018;28(1):44\u0026ndash;53. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1515/humaff-2018-0005\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1515/humaff-2018-0005\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKruglanski AW, Webster DM. Motivated closing of the mind: Seizing and freezing. Psychol Rev. 1996;103(2):263\u0026ndash;83. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.103.2.263\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/0033-295X.103.2.263\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLau ALD, Cummins RA, McPherson W. An Investigation into the Cross-Cultural Equivalence of the Personal Wellbeing Index. Soc Indic Res. 2005;72(3):403\u0026ndash;30. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-004-0561-z\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11205-004-0561-z\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLelkes Y. Ideological congruence and political tolerance. Pub Opin Q. 2022;86(2):317\u0026ndash;40. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfac014\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1093/poq/nfac014\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMason L. Uncivil agreement: How politics became our identity. University of Chicago Press; 2018.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMeyer IH. Prejudice, social stress, and mental health in lesbian, gay, and bisexual populations: Conceptual issues and research evidence. Psychol Bull. 2003;129(5):674\u0026ndash;97. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.5.674\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/0033-2909.129.5.674\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNapier JL, Jost JT. Why are conservatives happier than liberals? Psychol Sci. 2008;19(6):565\u0026ndash;72. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02124.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02124.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNelson MH. Resentment is like drinking poison? The heterogeneous health effects of affective polarization. J Health Soc Behav. 2022;63(4):508\u0026ndash;24. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/00221465221075311\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/00221465221075311\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePew Research Center. (2014). \u003cem\u003ePolitical polarization in the American public\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2014/06/12/political-polarization-in-the-american-public/\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2014/06/12/political-polarization-in-the-american-public/\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTajfel H, Turner JC. (2004). The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behavior. In \u003cem\u003ePolitical Psychology\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 276\u0026ndash;293). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.4324/9780203505984-16\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.4324/9780203505984-16\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Ideological consistency, personal well-being, and political polarization","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7091567/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7091567/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003ch2\u003eBackground\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003ePolitical polarization refers to the phenomenon of people moving away from the center and leaning towards extreme political ideologies. In recent years, there has been a discernible escalation of political polarization, which has significant implications for public health,. Studies have shown that heightened political animosity can lead to increased stress, anxiety, and a decline in mental well-being.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eMethods\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis research investigates whether these experiences impact people's well-being across the ideological spectrum. With a cross-sectional research design, the study recruited 1023 undergraduate medical students aged 18\u0026ndash;27 years, from Chennai, Tamil Nadu using census sampling. The study parameters were measured using self-report questionnaires: the Ideology Consistency Scale (ICS) and the Personality Well-Being Index - Adult \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;5 (PWI-A).\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eResults \u0026amp; Discussion\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe results revealed a significant negative correlation between ideological consistency and personal well-being (ρ = \u0026ndash; 0.453, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.006). This indicates that individuals with stronger ideological alignment are likely to experience lower subjective well- being. Furthermore, personal well-being differed significantly based on sexual orientation (\u003cem\u003eχ\u0026sup2;\u003c/em\u003e (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;9.73, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.008) and locality (\u003cem\u003eχ\u0026sup2;\u003c/em\u003e (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;18.78, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). Families with political affiliations were significantly associated with lower personal well-being compared to those without (\u003cem\u003eU\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;9819, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.002), but no significant difference was observed in ideological consistency rural background, and sexual orientation.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eConclusion\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003ePolitical polarization has a significant association with personal well-being. Promoting cognitive openness and balanced political discourse may help mitigate the mental health consequences of polarization.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Polarized Minds: Exploring the Link between Ideological Consistency and Personal Well-Being among Medical Students","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-07-30 14:22:49","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7091567/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"f71cb40d-2bda-47d5-b91f-77a79cc9287b","owner":[],"postedDate":"July 30th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-09-17T07:08:53+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-07-30 14:22:49","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-7091567","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-7091567","identity":"rs-7091567","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}