Party Animals? Extreme Partisan Polarization and Dehumanization

被引:0
|
作者
James L. Martherus
Andres G. Martinez
Paul K. Piff
Alexander G. Theodoridis
机构
[1] Vanderbilt University,
[2] Sonoma State University,undefined
[3] University of California,undefined
[4] University of California,undefined
来源
Political Behavior | 2021年 / 43卷
关键词
Dehumanization; Party identity; Partisanship; Affective polarization;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The affective, identity based, and often negative nature of partisan polarization in the United States has been a subject of much scholarly attention. Applying insights from recent work in social psychology, we employ three novel large-N, broadly representative online surveys, fielded over the course of 4 years, across two presidential administrations, to examine the extent to which this brand of polarization features a willingness to apply dehumanizing metaphors to out-partisans. We begin by looking at two different measures of dehumanization (one subtle and one more direct). This uncovers striking, consistent observational evidence that many partisans dehumanize members of the opposing party. We examine the relationship between dehumanization and other key partisan intensity measures, finding that it is most closely related to extreme affective polarization. We also show that dehumanization “predicts” partisan motivated reasoning and is correlated with respondent worldview. Finally, we present a survey experiment offering causal leverage to examine openness to dehumanization in the processing of new information about misdeeds by in- and out-partisans. Participants were exposed to identical information about a melee at a gathering, with the partisanship of those involved randomly assigned. We find pronounced willingness by both Democrats and Republicans to dehumanize members of the out-party. These findings shed considerable light on the nature and depth of modern partisan polarization.
引用
收藏
页码:517 / 540
页数:23
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Party Animals? Extreme Partisan Polarization and Dehumanization
    Martherus, James L.
    Martinez, Andres G.
    Piff, Paul K.
    Theodoridis, Alexander G.
    [J]. POLITICAL BEHAVIOR, 2021, 43 (02) : 517 - 540
  • [2] Anatomy of Party Sorting: Partisan Polarization of Voters and Party Switching
    Saeki, Manabu
    [J]. POLITICS & POLICY, 2019, 47 (04) : 699 - 747
  • [3] Partisan Dehumanization in American Politics
    Cassese, Erin C.
    [J]. POLITICAL BEHAVIOR, 2021, 43 (01) : 29 - 50
  • [4] Partisan Dehumanization in American Politics
    Erin C. Cassese
    [J]. Political Behavior, 2021, 43 : 29 - 50
  • [5] Pigeonholing Partisans: Stereotypes of Party Supporters and Partisan Polarization
    Rothschild, Jacob E.
    Howat, Adam J.
    Shafranek, Richard M.
    Busby, Ethan C.
    [J]. POLITICAL BEHAVIOR, 2019, 41 (02) : 423 - 443
  • [6] Pigeonholing Partisans: Stereotypes of Party Supporters and Partisan Polarization
    Jacob E. Rothschild
    Adam J. Howat
    Richard M. Shafranek
    Ethan C. Busby
    [J]. Political Behavior, 2019, 41 : 423 - 443
  • [7] Partisan Moods: Polarization and the Dynamics of Mass Party Preferences
    Ura, Joseph Daniel
    Ellis, Christopher R.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF POLITICS, 2012, 74 (01): : 277 - 291
  • [8] Correction to: Partisan Dehumanization in American Politics
    Erin C. Cassese
    [J]. Political Behavior, 2021, 43 (1) : 51 - 53
  • [9] Partisan news versus party cues: The effect of cross-cutting party and partisan network cues on polarization and persuasion
    Ozer, Adam L.
    Wright, Jamie M.
    [J]. RESEARCH & POLITICS, 2022, 9 (01)
  • [10] (Extreme) political polarization and party patronage
    Kopecky, Petr
    Meyer-Sahling, Jan-Hinrik
    Spirova, Maria
    [J]. IRISH POLITICAL STUDIES, 2022, 37 (02) : 218 - 243