Partisanship as a Social Identity: Implications for Polarization

Abstract

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 selfaffirmation 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.

Affective polarization, local contexts and public opinion in America

“…Partisan identity alone, however, is not enough to explain out-group animus 2,16 -one must also account for other changes in the political and media environment 2,4 . The partisan-ideological sorting of liberals to the Democratic Party and conservatives to the Republican Party 7 , as well as the social sorting that has led to more demographically homogenous parties 17 , have both contributed to partisan animosity.…”

Seeing Red and Blue: Political Discrimination at Work

“…For many workers, political affiliation serves as a stable and salient identity (West & Iyengar, 2020). As such, partisan workers desire to express this aspect of themselves.…”

From the theater to the hippodrome: A critique of Jeffrey Green’s theory of plebiscitary democracy and an alternative

“…For example, in US politics strong partisan group-identity generates 'motivated reasoning' (Mason, 2018, p. 3), through which 'partisans seek out information with congenial slant and sincerely adopt inaccurate beliefs that cast their party in a favorable light' (Petersen and Iyengar, 2020, p. 133). Finally, as partisan identity becomes a social identity (Mason, 2015;West and Iyengar, 2020), it is not the issue-position of citizens that moulds their party preferences, but the other way around (Achen and Bartels, 2017, p. 310;cf. Kinder and Kalmoe, 2017).…”