Fear and Loathing across Party Lines: New Evidence on Group Polarization
Fear and Loathing Across Party Lines: New Evidence on Group Polarization Shanto Iyengar and Sean J. Westwood Stanford University Draft: April 5, 2013
Abstract When defined in terms of social identity and affect toward in- and out-groups, the polarization of the American electorate has clearly increased. We document the scope and consequences of affective polarization using implicit, explicit, and behavioral indicators. Our evidence demonstrates not only that hostile feelings for the out-party are ingrained or automatic in voters’ psyches, but also that affective polarization based on party surpasses polarization based on race and other social cleavages. After documenting the extent of implicit party polarization, we show that party cues exert powerful effects on non-political judgments and behaviors. Partisans discriminate against out partisans, and do so to a degree that exceeds discrimination based on race. In concluding, we note that heightened partisan affect and the intrusion of partisan bias into non-political domains means that American parties now resemble the model of the “mass membership” party.
More than fifty years after the publication of The American Voter, debates over the nature of partisanship and the extent of party polarization continue (see Fiorina & Abrams, 2008; Hetherington, 2009). While early studies viewed partisanship as a manifestation of other group affiliations (Berelson, Lazarsfeld, and McPhee 1954; Campbell et al. 1960), more recent work suggests that party is an important affiliation in its own right (Green, Palmquist, and Schickler 2004; Greene 1999; Huddy, Mason, and Aarøe 2010; Iyengar, Sood, and Lelkes 2012). As a form of social identity, party affiliation generates positive evaluations of the in-group and correspondingly hostile evaluations of political opponents. This divergence in affect toward the in and out parties -- affective polarization -- has increased substantially over the past four decades (Haidt and
Abstract When defined in terms of social identity and affect toward in- and out-groups, the polarization of the American electorate has clearly increased. We document the scope and consequences of affective polarization using implicit, explicit, and behavioral indicators. Our evidence demonstrates not only that hostile feelings for the out-party are ingrained or automatic in voters’ psyches, but also that affective polarization based on party surpasses polarization based on race and other social cleavages. After documenting the extent of implicit party polarization, we show that party cues exert powerful effects on non-political judgments and behaviors. Partisans discriminate against out partisans, and do so to a degree that exceeds discrimination based on race. In concluding, we note that heightened partisan affect and the intrusion of partisan bias into non-political domains means that American parties now resemble the model of the “mass membership” party.
More than fifty years after the publication of The American Voter, debates over the nature of partisanship and the extent of party polarization continue (see Fiorina & Abrams, 2008; Hetherington, 2009). While early studies viewed partisanship as a manifestation of other group affiliations (Berelson, Lazarsfeld, and McPhee 1954; Campbell et al. 1960), more recent work suggests that party is an important affiliation in its own right (Green, Palmquist, and Schickler 2004; Greene 1999; Huddy, Mason, and Aarøe 2010; Iyengar, Sood, and Lelkes 2012). As a form of social identity, party affiliation generates positive evaluations of the in-group and correspondingly hostile evaluations of political opponents. This divergence in affect toward the in and out parties -- affective polarization -- has increased substantially over the past four decades (Haidt and