Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

The Forum

A Journal of Applied Research in Contemporary Politics

Ed. by Disalvo, Daniel / Stonecash, Jeffrey


IMPACT FACTOR 2018: 0.500
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 0.623

CiteScore 2018: 0.83

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.595
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.631

Online
ISSN
1540-8884
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 16, Issue 1

Issues

Affective Polarization and Ideological Sorting: A Reciprocal, Albeit Weak, Relationship

Yphtach Lelkes
  • Corresponding author
  • Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania, 3620 Walnut Street, Philadelphia, PA, USA
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2018-06-09 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/for-2018-0005

Abstract

American partisans are far more hostile towards out-party members than they were 40 years ago. While this phenomenon, often called affective polarization, is well-documented, political scientists disagree on its cause. One group of scholars believes that affective polarization is driven by processes related to social identity theory. In particular, cross-cutting identities have declined in America, and toxic political communication continuously primes partisan identities and resentment. Recently, several scholars have pointed to another phenomenon as the root cause of affective polarization: partisan sorting, i.e. the alignment of partisan identities with ideologically consistent issue positions. I review evidence in favor of each claim, and provide additional evidence that affective polarization has increased about as much among those who are not sorted as among those who are sorted. Furthermore, while sorting is only related to affective polarization among the most politically knowledgeable, affective polarization has increased across all levels of political knowledge. Finally, affective polarization may also increase sorting, further complicating any clear cut causal relationship.

References

  • Abramowitz, A. I. 2010. The Disappearing Center: Engaged Citizens, Polarization, and American Democracy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

  • Abramowitz, A. I., and K. L. Saunders. 2008. “Is Polarization a Myth?” The Journal of Politics 70 (02): 542–555.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Abramowitz, A. I., and S. Webster. 2016. “The Rise of Negative Partisanship and the Nationalization of U.S. Elections in the 21st Century.” Electoral Studies 41: 12–22.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Abramowitz, A. I., and S. Webster. 2018. “Negative Partisanship: Why Americans Dislike Parties But Behave Like Rabid Partisans.” Political Psychology 39: 119–135.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Abrams, D., and M. A. Hogg. 1988. “Comments on the Motivational Status of Self-Esteem in Social Identity and Intergroup Discrimination.” European Journal of Social Psychology 18 (4): 317–334.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Ahler, D. J., and G. Sood. 2018. “The Parties in Our Heads: Misperceptions About Party Composition and Their Consequences.” Journal of Politics. In press.Google Scholar

  • Bakker, B. N., Y. Lelkes, and A. Malka. 2018. An Expressive Utility Account of Partisan Cue Receptivity: Cognitive Resources in the Service of Identity Expression. Working Paper.Google Scholar

  • Bartels, L. M. 1996. “Uninformed Votes: Information Effects in Presidential Elections.” American Journal of Political Science 40 (1): 194–230.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Bougher, L. D. 2017. “The Correlates of Discord: Identity, Issue Alignment, and Political Hostility in Polarized America.” Political Behavior 39 (3): 731–762.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Boxell, L., M. Gentzkow, and J. M. Shapiro. 2017. “Greater Internet Use is Not Associated with Faster Growth in Political Polarization Among US Demographic Groups.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115 (3): 201706588.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Brady, H., and P. Sniderman. 1985. “Attitude Attribution: A Group Basis for Political Reasoning.” The American Political Science Review 79 (4): 1061–1078.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Campbell, A., P. E. Converse, W. E. Miller, and D. E. Stokes. 1960. The {A}merican Voter. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar

  • Carpini, M. X. D., S. Keeter, and M. X. Delli Carpini. 1997. What Americans Know About Politics and Why It Matters. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

  • Converse, P. “The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Politics.” In Ideology and Discontent, edited by D. Apter, 206–261. New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1964.Google Scholar

  • Deutsch, M., and H. B. Gerard. 1955. “A Study of Normative and Informational Social Influences Upon Individual Judgment.” The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 51 (3): 629.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Downs, A. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy (Vol. 13, p. 310). New York: Harper. doi:10.2307/444355.Google Scholar

  • Ellis, C., and J. A. Stimson. 2009. “Symbolic ideology in the American electorate.” Electoral Studies 28 (3): 388–402.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Finkel, S. E. 1995. Causal Analysis with Panel Data (No. 105). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

  • Fiorina, M. P. 1981. Retrospective Voting in American National Elections. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

  • Geer, J. G. 2012. “The News Media and the Rise of Negativity in Presidential Campaigns.” PS - Political Science and Politics 45 (3): 422–427.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Gilens, M. 2001. “Political Ignorance and Collective Policy Preferences.” American Political Science Review 95 (2): 379–396.Google Scholar

  • Gitlin, T. 2016. “The Outrage Industry: Political Opinion Media and the New Incivility By Jeffrey M. Berry and Sarah Sobieraj Oxford University Press. 2014. 288 pages. $29.95 hardcover.” Social Forces 95 (1): e26–e26.Google Scholar

  • Huddy, L., L. Mason, and L. Aarøe. 2015. “Expressive Partisanship: Campaign Involvement, Political Emotion, and Partisan Identity.” American Political Science Review 109 (1): 1–17.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Iyengar, S., and S. J. Westwood. 2015. “Fear and Loathing across Party Lines: New Evidence on Group Polarization.” American Journal of Political Science 59 (3): 690–707.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Iyengar, S., G. Sood, and Y. Lelkes. 2012. “Affect, Not Ideology: A Social Identity Perspective on Polarization.” Public Opinion Quarterly 76 (3): 405–431.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Kinder, D. R., and N. P. Kalmoe. 2017. Neither Liberal nor Conservative: Ideological Innocence in the American Public. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

  • Lee, F. E. 2016. Insecure Majorities: Congress and the Perpetual Campaign. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

  • Lelkes, Y., and P. M. Sniderman. 2016. “The Ideological Asymmetry of the American Party System.” British Journal of Political Science 46 (04): 825–844.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lelkes, Y., G. Sood, and S. Iyengar. 2017. “The Hostile Audience: The Effect of Access to Broadband Internet on Partisan Affect.” American Journal of Political Science 61 (1): 5–20.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lenz, G. S. 2009. “Learning and Opinion Change, Not Priming: Reconsidering the Priming Hypothesis.” American Journal of Political Science 53 (4): 821–837.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Levendusky, M. S. 2009. “The Microfoundations of Mass Polarization.” Political Analysis 17 (2): 162–176.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Malka, A., and Y. Lelkes. 2010. “More than Ideology: Conservative–Liberal Identity and Receptivity to Political Cues.” Social Justice Research 23 (2–3): 156–188.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Margolis, M. F. 2018. “How Politics Affects Religion: Partisanship, Socialization, and Religiosity in America.” The Journal of Politics 80 (1): 30–43.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Martin, G. J., and A. Yurukoglu. 2017. “Bias in Cable News: Persuasion and Polarization.” American Economic Review 107 (9): 2565–2599.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Mason, L. 2015. ““I Disrespectfully Agree”: The Differential Effects of Partisan Sorting on Social and Issue Polarization.” American Journal of Political Science 59 (1): 128–145.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Mason, L. 2016. “A Cross-Cutting Calm: How Social Sorting Drives Affective Polarization.” Public Opinion Quarterly 80 (S1): 351–377.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Mason, L. 2018. “Ideologues Without Issues the Polarizing Consequences of Ideological Identities.” Public Opinion Quarterly 82 (S1): 280–301.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Mason, L., and J. Wronski. 2018. “One Tribe to Bind Them All: How Our Social Group Attachments Strengthen Partisanship.” Political Psychology 39: 257–277.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Ridout, T. N., E. Franklin Fowler, M. M. Franz, and K. Goldstein. 2018. “The Long-Term and Geographically Constrained Effects of Campaign Advertising on Political Polarization and Sorting.” American Politics Research 46 (1): 3–25.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Rogowski, J. C., and J. L. Sutherland. 2016. “How Ideology Fuels Affective Polarization.” Political Behavior 38 (2): 485–508.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Rubin, M., and M. Hewstone. 1998. “Social Identity Theory’s Self-Esteem Hypothesis: A Review and Some Suggestions for Clarification.” Personality and Social Psychology Review 2 (1): 40–62.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Sobieraj, S., and J. M. Berry. 2011. “From Incivility to Outrage: Political Discourse in Blogs, Talk Radio, and Cable News.” Political Communication 28 (1): 19–41.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Sood, G., and S. Iyengar. 2016. “Coming to Dislike Your Opponents: The Polarizing Impact of Political Campaigns.” Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2840225 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2840225.

  • Sood, G., and S. Iyengar. 2017. “All in the Eye of the Beholder.” In The Feeling, Thinking Citizen: Essays in Honor of Milton Lodge, 1st ed., edited by H. Lavine and C. Taber, 195–228. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

  • Tajfel, H. 1982. “Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations.” Annual Review of Psychology 33 (1): 1–39.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Turner, J. C. 1981. “Towards a Cognitive Redefinition of the Social Group.” Current Psychology of Cognition 1 (2): 93–118.Google Scholar

  • Webster, S. W., and A. I. Abramowitz. 2017. “The Ideological Foundations of Affective Polarization in the U.S. Electorate.” American Politics Research 45 (4): 621–647.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2018-06-09


Citation Information: The Forum, Volume 16, Issue 1, Pages 67–79, ISSN (Online) 1540-8884, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/for-2018-0005.

Export Citation

©2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in