Partisanship as a Social Identity: Implications for Polarization

被引:133
作者
West, Emily A. [1 ]
Iyengar, Shanto [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Pittsburgh, Dept Polit Sci, Pittsburgh, PA 15260 USA
[2] Stanford Univ, Dept Polit Sci, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
关键词
Partisanship; Polarization; Identity politics; Political psychology; SELF-AFFIRMATION; PSYCHOLOGY; ISSUE; CATEGORIZATION; CONSEQUENCES; ACHIEVEMENT; AGREEMENT; ATTITUDES; RISE;
D O I
10.1007/s11109-020-09637-y
中图分类号
D0 [政治学、政治理论];
学科分类号
0302 ; 030201 ;
摘要
The claim that partisanship has developed into a social identity is one of the dominant explanations for the current rising levels of affective polarization among the U.S. electorate. We provide evidence that partisanship functions as a social identity, but that the salience of partisan identity-in and of itself-does not account for increased affective polarization. Using a two-wave panel survey capturing natural variation in the salience of politics, we find that partisanship contributes more to individuals' self-concept in times of heightened political salience. We also show that partisans can be detached from their Democratic or Republican identity by having them focus on individuating characteristics (by way of a self-affirmation treatment). However, we find only limited evidence that when partisan social identity is made less salient, either by way of natural variation in political context or through a self-affirmation treatment, partisans are any less inclined to express in-party favoritism and out-party hostility. Taken together, our evidence shows that partisanship does operate as an important social identity, but that affective polarization is likely attributable to more than the classic in-group versus out-group distinction.
引用
收藏
页码:807 / 838
页数:32
相关论文
共 61 条
[1]   The rise of negative partisanship and the nationalization of US elections in the 21st century [J].
Abramowitz, Alan I. ;
Webster, Steven .
ELECTORAL STUDIES, 2016, 41 :12-22
[2]   Negative and Positive Partisanship in the 2016 US Presidential Elections [J].
Bankert, Alexa .
POLITICAL BEHAVIOR, 2021, 43 (04) :1467-1485
[3]  
Baumeister R., 1999, Personality: Contemporary theory and research, P339
[4]   SOCIAL CATEGORIZATION AND SIMILARITY IN INTERGROUP BEHAVIOUR [J].
BILLIG, M ;
TAJFEL, H .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1973, 3 (01) :27-52
[5]   Seeing the Other Side: Reducing Political Partisanship via Self-Affirmation in the 2008 Presidential Election [J].
Binning, Kevin R. ;
Sherman, David K. ;
Cohen, Geoffrey L. ;
Heitland, Kirsten .
ANALYSES OF SOCIAL ISSUES AND PUBLIC POLICY, 2010, 10 (01) :276-292
[6]   The Correlates of Discord: Identity, Issue Alignment, and Political Hostility in Polarized America [J].
Bougher, Lori D. .
POLITICAL BEHAVIOR, 2017, 39 (03) :731-762
[7]   The psychology of prejudice: Ingroup love or outgroup hate? [J].
Brewer, MB .
JOURNAL OF SOCIAL ISSUES, 1999, 55 (03) :429-444
[8]  
Campbell Angus, 1960, The American voter
[9]  
Chandra K., 2012, CONSTRUCTIVIST THEOR, P385
[10]  
Cohen G.L., 2012, Ideology, Psychology, and Law, P385, DOI DOI 10.1093/ACPROF:OSO/9780199737512.001.0001/ACPROF-9780199737512-CHAPTER-15