(Mis)estimating Affective Polarization

2021/06/03 by James N. Druckman, James Druckman, Samara Klar +3 · 26 citations
Social Sciences · #Electoral Systems and Political Participation #Social and Intergroup Psychology #Social Media and Politics

paper · doi:10.1086/715603

Abstract

Affective polarization—the tendency of ordinary partisans to dislike and distrust those from the other party—is a defining feature of contemporary American politics. High levels of out-party animus stem, in part, from misperceptions of the other party’s voters. Specifically, individuals misestimate the ideological extremity and political engagement of typical out-partisans. When partisans are asked about “Democrats” or the “Republican Party,” they bring to mind stereotypes of engaged ideologues and, hence, express contempt for the other party. The reality, however, is that such individuals are the exception rather than the norm. We show that when partisans learn that reality, partisan animus falls sharply; partisans do not have much animus toward the typical member of the other party. Our results suggest antidotes for vitiating affective polarization but also complicate understandings of good citizenship.

Citations

• Is Polarization a Myth?
• The Limits of Partisan Prejudice
• The Parties in Our Heads: Misperceptions about Party Composition and Their Consequences

Cited by

• Continuity and Change in Trust in Scientists in the United States: Demographic Stability and Partisan Polarization
• A New Measure of Affective Polarization
• The Polarizing Effect of Partisan Echo Chambers
• Is Affective Polarization Driven by Identity, Loyalty, or Substance?
• Social Desirability and Affective Polarization
• Issues, Groups, or Idiots? Comparing Theories of Partisan Stereotypes
• Perspective Getting and Cross-Party Support for Electoral Fairness
• Affective polarization within parties
• A critique of the polarisation narrative: expanding the limits of democracy, parties and political participation
• Blocking of counter-partisan accounts drives political assortment on Twitter
• The Partisan Effects of News Coverage Highlighting Inclusion in Congress
• Political censorship feels acceptable when ideas seem harmful and false
• Polarization All the Way Down: How Coverage of Elite and Partisan Polarization Spills Over to Perceptions of the U.S. Mass Public
• Bringing critical social psychology to the study of political polarization
• Current research overstates American support for political violence
• The polarizing content warning: how the media can reduce affective polarization
• Cross-partisan discussions reduced political polarization between UK voters, but less so when they disagreed
• A New Measure of Affective Polarization
• Partisanship and the Social Construction of Deservingness in the United States
• Correcting inaccurate metaperceptions reduces Americans’ support for partisan violence
• A Waste of Time? Partisan Deliberative Bias as a Barrier to Political Crosstalk
• Reasonable or radical? First-order, second-order, and meta-stereotypes of different climate activists among the German public and climate activists
• Illusory interparty disagreement: Partisans agree on what hate speech to censor but do not know it
• U.S. television news coverage of climate change policy is aggregately balanced but polarized
• Does the Method Affect the Outcome? How Measures of Partisan Slant of Media Outlets and Affective Polarization Drive Results About Polarization in the United States
• Perspective-Taking and Partisan Depolarization in the U.S. and Turkey

Related

• Fear and Loathing across Party Lines: New Evidence on Group Polarization
• The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States
• Affective Polarization or Partisan Disdain?
• What Do We Measure When We Measure Affective Polarization?
• The Group Basis of Partisan Affective Polarization