Affective Polarization in Political and Nonpolitical Settings

IF 1.9 3区 社会学 Q2 COMMUNICATION
T. Rudolph, Marc J Hetherington
{"title":"Affective Polarization in Political and Nonpolitical Settings","authors":"T. Rudolph, Marc J Hetherington","doi":"10.1093/ijpor/edaa040","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n We seek to understand the extent to which affective polarization is driven by in-group love or out-group hate and whether it varies across context. The answer may, in turn, allow us to evaluate how well the fundamental premises of social identity theory mesh with different manifestations of affective polarization. Using an experiment to analyze partisans’ trust judgments, we find that the amount of affective polarization and the dominant mechanism underlying it varies by context—whether political or nonpolitical. We find that affective polarization is nearly twice as strong in political settings as in nonpolitical settings. In addition, although affective polarization reflects a blend of both in-party love and out-party hate in both contexts, we find that in-party love is the more dominant source of polarization in nonpolitical settings while out-party hate is the more dominant source in political settings. The latter finding causes us to question how well-suited social identity theory is for understanding polarization in the political sphere.","PeriodicalId":51480,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Public Opinion Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Public Opinion Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edaa040","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

We seek to understand the extent to which affective polarization is driven by in-group love or out-group hate and whether it varies across context. The answer may, in turn, allow us to evaluate how well the fundamental premises of social identity theory mesh with different manifestations of affective polarization. Using an experiment to analyze partisans’ trust judgments, we find that the amount of affective polarization and the dominant mechanism underlying it varies by context—whether political or nonpolitical. We find that affective polarization is nearly twice as strong in political settings as in nonpolitical settings. In addition, although affective polarization reflects a blend of both in-party love and out-party hate in both contexts, we find that in-party love is the more dominant source of polarization in nonpolitical settings while out-party hate is the more dominant source in political settings. The latter finding causes us to question how well-suited social identity theory is for understanding polarization in the political sphere.
政治和非政治环境中的情感两极分化
我们试图了解群体内的爱或群体外的恨在多大程度上驱动了情感两极分化,以及它是否因环境而异。反过来,答案可能会让我们评估社会认同理论的基本前提与情感两极分化的不同表现之间的契合程度。通过一项实验来分析党派人士的信任判断,我们发现情感两极分化的程度及其背后的主导机制因背景而异——无论是政治还是非政治。我们发现,在政治环境中,情感两极分化几乎是非政治环境中的两倍。此外,尽管情感两极分化在两种情况下都反映了党内爱和党外恨的混合,但我们发现,在非政治环境中,党内爱是两极分化的更主要来源,而在政治环境中则是党外恨。后一个发现让我们质疑社会认同理论在多大程度上适合理解政治领域的两极分化。
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
3.10
自引率
11.10%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Public Opinion Research welcomes manuscripts that describe: - studies of public opinion that contribute to theory development and testing about political, social and current issues, particularly those that involve comparative analysis; - the role of public opinion polls in political decision making, the development of public policies, electoral behavior, and mass communications; - evaluations of and improvements in the methodology of public opinion surveys.
×
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