Affective polarization, local contexts and public opinion in America

被引:250
作者
Druckman, James N. [1 ,2 ]
Klar, Samara [3 ]
Krupnikov, Yanna [4 ]
Levendusky, Matthew [5 ]
Ryan, John Barry [4 ]
机构
[1] Northwestern Univ, Dept Polit Sci, Evanston, IL 60208 USA
[2] Northwestern Univ, Inst Policy Res, Evanston, IL 60208 USA
[3] Univ Arizona, Sch Govt & Publ Policy, Tucson, AZ USA
[4] SUNY Stony Brook, Dept Polit Sci, Stony Brook, NY 11794 USA
[5] Univ Penn, Dept Polit Sci, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
关键词
SENSITIVITY-ANALYSIS; IDENTITY; PARTISANSHIP; IDEOLOGY; PARTY; MISPERCEPTIONS; CONSEQUENCES;
D O I
10.1038/s41562-020-01012-5
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Affective polarization has become a defining feature of twenty-first-century US politics, but we do not know how it relates to citizens' policy opinions. Answering this question has fundamental implications not only for understanding the political consequences of polarization, but also for understanding how citizens form preferences. Under most political circumstances, this is a difficult question to answer, but the novel coronavirus pandemic allows us to understand how partisan animus contributes to opinion formation. Using a two-wave panel that spans the outbreak of COVID-19, we find a strong association between citizens' levels of partisan animosity and their attitudes about the pandemic, as well as the actions they take in response to it. This relationship, however, is more muted in areas with severe outbreaks of the disease. Our results make clear that narrowing of issue divides requires not only policy discourse but also addressing affective partisan hostility. Druckman et al. use a two-wave survey fielded before and during the COVID-19 pandemic to study the relationship between affective polarization and issue positions. They find an association between previous out-party animus and COVID-19 policy beliefs, and local context moderates this relationship.
引用
收藏
页码:28 / 38
页数:13
相关论文
共 70 条
[31]   The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States [J].
Iyengar, Shanto ;
Lelkes, Yphtach ;
Levendusky, Matthew ;
Malhotra, Neil ;
Westwood, Sean J. .
ANNUAL REVIEW OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, VOL 22, 2019, 22 :129-146
[32]   The Strengthening of Partisan Affect [J].
Iyengar, Shanto ;
Krupenkin, Masha .
POLITICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2018, 39 :201-218
[33]   AFFECT, NOT IDEOLOGY A SOCIAL IDENTITY PERSPECTIVE ON POLARIZATION [J].
Iyengar, Shanto ;
Sood, Gaurav ;
Lelkes, Yphtach .
PUBLIC OPINION QUARTERLY, 2012, 76 (03) :405-431
[34]  
Kam Cindy., 2009, Modeling and interpreting interactive hypotheses in regression analysis
[35]   Effect of Media Environment Diversity and Advertising Tone on Information Search, Selective Exposure, and Affective Polarization [J].
Lau, Richard R. ;
Andersen, David J. ;
Ditonto, Tessa M. ;
Kleinberg, Mona S. ;
Redlawsk, David P. .
POLITICAL BEHAVIOR, 2017, 39 (01) :231-255
[36]  
Leeper T. J., 2018, INTERPRETING REGRESS
[37]   Political Parties, Motivated Reasoning, and Public Opinion Formation [J].
Leeper, Thomas J. ;
Slothuus, Rune .
POLITICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2014, 35 :129-156
[38]   Policy over party: comparing the effects of candidate ideology and party on affective polarization [J].
Lelkes, Yphtach .
POLITICAL SCIENCE RESEARCH AND METHODS, 2021, 9 (01) :189-196
[39]   Affective Polarization and Ideological Sorting: A Reciprocal, Albeit Weak, Relationship [J].
Lelkes, Yphtach .
FORUM-A JOURNAL OF APPLIED RESEARCH IN CONTEMPORARY POLITICS, 2018, 16 (01) :67-79
[40]   The Limits of Partisan Prejudice [J].
Lelkes, Yphtach ;
Westwood, Sean J. .
JOURNAL OF POLITICS, 2017, 79 (02) :485-501