Our system is currently under heavy load due to increased usage. We're actively working on upgrades to improve performance. Thank you for your patience.
2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.cobeha.2020.03.008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Polarization in America: two possible futures

Abstract: The rise of polarization over the past 25 years has many Americans worried about the state of politics. This worry is understandable: up to a point, polarization can help democracies, but when it becomes too vast, such that entire swaths of the population refuse to consider each other's views, this thwarts democratic methods for solving societal problems. Given widespread polarization in America, what lies ahead? We describe two possible futures, each based on different sets of theory and evidence. On one hand… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
27
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
3
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 72 publications
(36 citation statements)
references
References 73 publications
2
27
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, political polarization has been tied to negative outgroup evaluations, as well as reduced trust and efficacy (Enders & Armaly, 2019), increased political engagement (Westfall et al, 2015), and intolerance toward ideologically dissimilar groups in defense of worldviews across the political spectrum (Brandt & Crawford, 2020; Brandt et al, 2014). It has also been linked to democratic erosion (Heltzel & Laurin, 2020; Vegetti, 2019), the increased spread of misinformation (i.e., “fake news,” conspiracy theories; Van Bavel et al, 2021), and greater distrust and antagonism during times of crisis (e.g., the COVID‐19 pandemic; Crimston & Selvanathan, 2020). However, moral polarization is distinct from standard political polarization in crucial ways.…”
Section: Moral Polarizationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, political polarization has been tied to negative outgroup evaluations, as well as reduced trust and efficacy (Enders & Armaly, 2019), increased political engagement (Westfall et al, 2015), and intolerance toward ideologically dissimilar groups in defense of worldviews across the political spectrum (Brandt & Crawford, 2020; Brandt et al, 2014). It has also been linked to democratic erosion (Heltzel & Laurin, 2020; Vegetti, 2019), the increased spread of misinformation (i.e., “fake news,” conspiracy theories; Van Bavel et al, 2021), and greater distrust and antagonism during times of crisis (e.g., the COVID‐19 pandemic; Crimston & Selvanathan, 2020). However, moral polarization is distinct from standard political polarization in crucial ways.…”
Section: Moral Polarizationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…First, it is widely accepted that COVID-19 has become a politicized issue among the US electorate (Pew Research Center, 2020d). Political polarization is the adoption of increasingly dissimilar attitudes and opinions towards policies or issues among subsets of the population ( Heltzel & Laurin, 2020 ). This polarization, fueled by US media and politicians, has weakened the public health response and resulted in worse impacts per capita compared to other industrialized nations, thus leading to strong opinions among the US electorate ( Bruine de Bruin et al, 2020 , Mordecai and Connaughton, 2020 ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Partisans’ misperceptions of their political opponents initiates a positive feedback loop of reciprocal animosity, which reinforces overly negative perceptions (Hetzel & Laurin, 2020). This contributes to intractable partisan conflict and destabilizes American democracy (Barber & McCarty, 2016).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%