The current debate over the extent of polarization in the American mass public focuses on the extent to which partisans’ policy preferences have moved. Whereas "maximalists" claim that partisans’ views on policies have become more extreme over time (Abramowitz 2010), "minimalists" (Fiorina and Abrams 2009) contend that the majority of Americans remain centrist, and that what little centrifugal movement has occurred reflects sorting, i.e., the increased association between partisanship and ideology. We argue in favor of an alternative definition of polarization, based on the classic concept of social distance (Bogardus 1947). Using data from a variety of sources, we demonstrate that both Republicans and Democrats increasingly dislike, even loathe, their opponents. We also find that partisan affect is inconsistently (and perhaps artifactually) founded in policy attitudes. The more plausible account lies in the nature of political campaigns; exposure to messages attacking the out-group reinforces partisans’ biased views of their opponents.

Affect, Not Ideology A Social Identity Perspective on Polarization

Does media bias affect voting? We analyze the entry of Fox News in cable markets and its impact on voting. Between October 1996 and November 2000, the conservative Fox News Channel was introduced i ...

/pdf/the-fox-news-effect-media-bias-and-voting-kpl5jv7s4a.pdf

The Fox News Effect: Media Bias and Voting

I examine the impact of long-term partisan loyalties on perceptions of specific political figures and events. In contrast to the notion of partisanship as a simple “running tally” of political assessments, I show that party identification is a pervasive dynamic force shaping citizens' perceptions of, and reactions to, the political world. My analysis employs panel data to isolate the impact of partisan bias in the context of a Bayesian model of opinion change; I also present more straightforward evidence of contrasts in Democrats' and Republicans' perceptions of “objective” politically relevant events. I conclude that partisan bias in political perceptions plays a crucial role in perpetuating and reinforcing sharp differences in opinion between Democrats and Republicans. This conclusion handsomely validates the emphasis placed by the authors of The American Voter on “the role of enduring partisan commitments in shaping attitudes toward political objects.”

/pdf/beyond-the-running-tally-partisan-bias-in-political-74p012qsou.pdf

Beyond the Running Tally: Partisan Bias in Political Perceptions

When defined in terms of social identity and affect toward copartisans and opposing partisans, the polarization of the American electorate has dramatically increased. We document the scope and consequences of affective polarization of partisansusingimplicit,explicit,andbehavioralindicators.Ourevidencedemonstratesthathostilefeelingsfortheopposing party are ingrained or automatic in voters’ minds, and that affective polarization based on party is just as strong as polarization based on race. We further show that party cues exert powerful effects on nonpolitical judgments and behaviors. Partisans discriminate against opposing partisans, doing so to a degree that exceeds discrimination based on race. We note that the willingness of partisans to display open animus for opposing partisans can be attributed to the absence of norms governing the expression of negative sentiment and that increased partisan affect provides an incentive for elites to engage in confrontation rather than cooperation.

Fear and Loathing across Party Lines: New Evidence on Group Polarization

Scholars routinely make claims that presuppose the validity of the observations and measurements that operationalize their concepts. Yet, despite recent advances in political science methods, surprisingly little attention has been devoted to measurement validity. We address this gap by exploring four themes. First, we seek to establish a shared framework that allows quantitative and qualitative scholars to assess more effectively, and communicate about, issues of valid measurement. Second, we underscore the need to draw a clear distinction between measurement issues and disputes about concepts. Third, we discuss the contextual specificity of measurement claims, exploring a variety of measurement strategies that seek to combine generality and validity by devoting greater attention to context. Fourth, we address the proliferation of terms for alternative measurement validation procedures and offer an account of the three main types of validation most relevant to political scientists.

Measurement Validity: A Shared Standard for Qualitative and Quantitative Research

In this authoritative study, three political scientists demonstrate that identification with political parties powerfully determines how citizens look at politics and cast their ballots. "Partisan Hearts and Minds is a profound breakthrough in our understanding of partisan loyalties and makes a major contribution to the study of political attitudes and voting behavior."-Paul Abramson, Michigan State University "This book will be influential the moment it appears. It will be the starting point for all further treatments of the topic."-Richard Johnston, University of British Columbia "The grounding of partisanship in social identities is the most important theoretical contribution to the study of partisanship in the last two decades."-Morris P. Fiorina, Stanford University

Partisan Hearts and Minds: Political Parties and the Social Identities of Voters

In this article we examine the effects of measurement error on the apparent stability of party identification. As others have noted, party identification appears to be highly stable once measurement error is taken into account. This seems to be in conflict with recent models that claim to demonstrate the responsiveness of partisanship to short-term political forces. Using data from the 1980 National Election Study Major Panel, we demonstrate that when measurement error is included explicitly in models of political behavior, the effects of performance evaluations, candidate evaluations, issue proximities, or vote choices on party identification are negligible. Thus, it appears that the findings that show a significant impact of these short-term forces on partisanship represent artifacts of inadequate measurement model specification. Our results suggest that the outstanding characteristic of party identification is its persistence over time.

Of Artifacts and Partisan Instability

This essay refines and extends our argument (Green and Palmquist, 1990) that net of the distorting effects of measurement error, Americans' partisanship tends to be highly stable over time. Three challenges to this thesis are addressed. In response to doubts about the generalizability of our earlier findings to panel studies of longer duration or from other eras, we show that nine multi-wave panel studies yield similar results. Next, we take up the question of whether our model can account for observed patterns of partisan conversion. The rate of party-switching forces some modifications in the statistical assumptions used to model party identification over time, but a revised model which can account for inter-party change reproduces earlier findings of partisan stability. Third, we grapple with the question of how our findings square with fluctuations in what has been termed “macropartisanship”. We suggest that aggregate shifts in party identification need not be incompatible with strong over-time correlations at the individual level. Finally, we develop a simulation of micropartisanship to illustrate that over long stretches of time very gradual changes in partisanship can accumulate to produce appreciable levels of micropartisan change.

How stable is party identification

MacKuen, Erikson, and Stimson (1989, 1992) argue that the aggregate distribution of party identification, or macropartisanship, shifts significantly over short periods in response to changes in presidential popularity and consumer sentiment. Their results are based on a subset of Gallup surveys available from 1953 to 1988 and only those CBS /New York Times surveys conducted during the Reagan administration. We replicate this analysis using a more extensive inventory of Gallup and CBS /New York Times data and find considerably less evidence of partisan fluctuation. The amount of partisan change caused by short-term movements in consumer sentiment and presidential popularity is found to be two to three times smaller than initially reported by MacKuen et al. (1989). Our results indicate that macropartisanship adjusts to short-term shocks in a limited and gradual fashion, consistent with traditional views of partisan realignment.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S0003055400215888

Macropartisanship: A Replication and Critique

Single-indicator multiwave models provide one way to estimate the error variance of survey items. Two influential papers in the early 1970s (Wiley and Wiley 1970; Wiley and Wiley 1974) presented variations of such models for three waves of data. The first assumes that the only measurement error present is random (RE model). The second allows for correlated errors (CE model). The RE model has frequently been applied with useful results. The CE model, on the contrary, has rarely been used and tends to produce anomalous results. CE estimates based on only three waves of data are shown to be generally so sensitive to sampling error that they are uninformative. The standard errors of the CE model improve substantially when panels of four or more waves are used. This improvement, however, is contingent on the appropriateness of extending the rigid assumptions underlying the three-wave CE model to longer panels.

Bradley Palmquist

Papers

Partisan Hearts and Minds: Political Parties and the Social Identities of Voters

Of Artifacts and Partisan Instability

How stable is party identification

Macropartisanship: A Replication and Critique

Estimation of Models with Correlated Measurement Errors from Panel Data