Affective polarization, support for democracy, and the mediating role of the winner-loser status. A comparative study

Carolina Segovia
{"title":"Affective polarization, support for democracy, and the mediating role of the winner-loser status. A comparative study","authors":"Carolina Segovia","doi":"10.5354/0719-3769.2023.71014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Does affective polarization undermine support for and satis­faction with democracy? In this article, I argue that it does. However, this effect is mediated by the outcome of elections, which group people along the winner-loser divide. I argue that support for and satisfaction with democracy will remain high or increase among polarized publics as long as the outcome of the elections benefits their own party, but not when it benefits the opposing groups. I test these hypotheses using data for 31 elections in 28 countries from CSES project. Results show that affective polarization does not undermine support for democracy and that it increases satisfaction with democracy. Additionally, the results indicate that the relationship between affective polarization and support for democracy will be diffe­rent for winners and losers of the election.","PeriodicalId":30847,"journal":{"name":"Estudios Internacionales","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Estudios Internacionales","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5354/0719-3769.2023.71014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Does affective polarization undermine support for and satis­faction with democracy? In this article, I argue that it does. However, this effect is mediated by the outcome of elections, which group people along the winner-loser divide. I argue that support for and satisfaction with democracy will remain high or increase among polarized publics as long as the outcome of the elections benefits their own party, but not when it benefits the opposing groups. I test these hypotheses using data for 31 elections in 28 countries from CSES project. Results show that affective polarization does not undermine support for democracy and that it increases satisfaction with democracy. Additionally, the results indicate that the relationship between affective polarization and support for democracy will be diffe­rent for winners and losers of the election.
情感两极分化,对民主的支持,以及输赢地位的中介作用。比较研究
情感两极分化是否会削弱对民主的支持和满意度?在本文中,我认为确实如此。然而,这种影响受到选举结果的调节,选举结果将人们划分为赢家和输家。我认为,只要选举结果有利于自己的政党,两极分化的公众对民主的支持和满意度就会保持在很高的水平,甚至会增加,但如果选举结果有利于对立群体,就不会。我用CSES项目中28个国家31次选举的数据来检验这些假设。结果表明,情感两极分化不会削弱对民主的支持,反而会增加对民主的满意度。此外,结果表明,情感极化与民主支持之间的关系在选举的赢家和输家中会有所不同。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信