{"title":"Disagreement Does Not Always Mean Division: Evidence from Five Decades of American Public Opinion","authors":"Stuart Perrett","doi":"10.1093/poq/nfad020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Are those things on which Americans most disagree the same things that divide liberals and conservatives or Democrats and Republicans? How has this changed over time? To answer these questions, I use 350 subjective items from five decades of the General Social Survey. Estimating disagreement with ordinal dispersion and using a novel measure of sorting by party and ideological identification, I find an increasing positive association between the two phenomena. In the 1970s, the likelihood that opinion on contentious items divided partisans was low. Since then, this probability has increased. Disagreement has been more consistently associated with higher levels of ideological sorting, though this relationship has also strengthened since the 1980s. I then ask which items and substantive domains have propelled the politicization of disagreement. I decompose the estimated coefficients between disagreement and sorting by item to quantify their contribution in each decade. I find that opinions from two domains play a large role throughout the period: public spending, and sexuality and abortion. Nevertheless, there is a great deal of heterogeneity within domains and over time. Though disagreement between Americans has increasingly sorted, a relatively small number of items drive this relationship in any one decade. Even among voters, a good proportion of disagreement remains unrelated to ideological or partisan divisions.","PeriodicalId":51359,"journal":{"name":"Public Opinion Quarterly","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-12","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/nfad020","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
Are those things on which Americans most disagree the same things that divide liberals and conservatives or Democrats and Republicans? How has this changed over time? To answer these questions, I use 350 subjective items from five decades of the General Social Survey. Estimating disagreement with ordinal dispersion and using a novel measure of sorting by party and ideological identification, I find an increasing positive association between the two phenomena. In the 1970s, the likelihood that opinion on contentious items divided partisans was low. Since then, this probability has increased. Disagreement has been more consistently associated with higher levels of ideological sorting, though this relationship has also strengthened since the 1980s. I then ask which items and substantive domains have propelled the politicization of disagreement. I decompose the estimated coefficients between disagreement and sorting by item to quantify their contribution in each decade. I find that opinions from two domains play a large role throughout the period: public spending, and sexuality and abortion. Nevertheless, there is a great deal of heterogeneity within domains and over time. Though disagreement between Americans has increasingly sorted, a relatively small number of items drive this relationship in any one decade. Even among voters, a good proportion of disagreement remains unrelated to ideological or partisan divisions.
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.