Polarization Eh? Ideological Divergence and Partisan Sorting in the Canadian Mass Public

IF 2.9 1区 社会学 Q1 COMMUNICATION
Eric Merkley
{"title":"Polarization Eh? Ideological Divergence and Partisan Sorting in the Canadian Mass Public","authors":"Eric Merkley","doi":"10.1093/poq/nfac047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There has been increasing concern among commentators and scholars about polarization in Canada. This note uses the Canadian Election Study from 1993 to 2019 to measure trends in ideological divergence, ideological consistency, and partisan-ideological sorting in the Canadian mass public. It finds only mixed evidence that Canadians are diverging ideologically and becoming more polarized—ideological distributions are unimodal and trends toward more dispersion are slight and driven entirely by the last two election cycles. Canadians are, however, becoming modestly more ideologically consistent and much more sorted—that is, partisanship, ideological identification, and policy beliefs are increasingly interconnected. These findings call for additional research on the causes and consequences of mass polarization in Canada and further efforts to situate these results, along with findings from the United States, in a comparative context.","PeriodicalId":51359,"journal":{"name":"Public Opinion Quarterly","volume":"244 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Opinion Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfac047","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

There has been increasing concern among commentators and scholars about polarization in Canada. This note uses the Canadian Election Study from 1993 to 2019 to measure trends in ideological divergence, ideological consistency, and partisan-ideological sorting in the Canadian mass public. It finds only mixed evidence that Canadians are diverging ideologically and becoming more polarized—ideological distributions are unimodal and trends toward more dispersion are slight and driven entirely by the last two election cycles. Canadians are, however, becoming modestly more ideologically consistent and much more sorted—that is, partisanship, ideological identification, and policy beliefs are increasingly interconnected. These findings call for additional research on the causes and consequences of mass polarization in Canada and further efforts to situate these results, along with findings from the United States, in a comparative context.
极化是吗?加拿大大众中的意识形态分歧与党派分类
评论人士和学者越来越关注加拿大的两极分化。本文使用1993年至2019年的加拿大选举研究来衡量加拿大大众中意识形态分歧、意识形态一致性和党派意识形态分类的趋势。报告发现,只有混合的证据表明,加拿大人的意识形态正在分化,并变得更加两极分化——意识形态的分布是单峰的,更分散的趋势是轻微的,完全是由最近两个选举周期驱动的。然而,加拿大人在意识形态上变得更加一致,也更加分类——也就是说,党派之争、意识形态认同和政策信仰日益相互关联。这些调查结果要求对加拿大大规模两极分化的原因和后果进行进一步研究,并进一步努力将这些结果与美国的调查结果放在一个比较的背景下。
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
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
2.90%
发文量
51
期刊介绍: Published since 1937, Public Opinion Quarterly is among the most frequently cited journals of its kind. Such interdisciplinary leadership benefits academicians and all social science researchers by providing a trusted source for a wide range of high quality research. POQ selectively publishes important theoretical contributions to opinion and communication research, analyses of current public opinion, and investigations of methodological issues involved in survey validity—including questionnaire construction, interviewing and interviewers, sampling strategy, and mode of administration. The theoretical and methodological advances detailed in pages of POQ ensure its importance as a research resource.
×
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