The Political Uses and Abuses of Civility and Incivility

Jamieson, Kathleen Hall; Volinsky, Allyson; Weitz, Ilana; Kenski, Kate

doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199793471.013.79_update_001

Cited by 32 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 15 publications

(15 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is arguably true that “insults and invective are a powerful means of differentiating an in‐group from an out‐group, an opponent from an ally” (Jamieson, Volinsky, Weitz, & Kenski, , p. 6). But there is perhaps more to misogyny than a process of intergroup differentiation.…”

Section: Emotional Capital Of Extreme Hostilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Communicating misogyny: An interdisciplinary research agenda for social psychology

Tileagă

2019

Social & Personality Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this paper is to discuss how social psychology might go about studying social hostility in public life that goes beyond mere disagreement on political matters. The paper addresses the case of online misogyny against women active in public life. In the context of a profound coarsening of political debate in Britain and elsewhere, women who are active in public life come regularly up against a barrage of abuse and intimidation online. The paper argues that manifestations of misogyny cross ideological lines and takes an array of forms. Misogyny is a specific class of prejudice that harms the dignity of women by calling into question women's (human) rights to participation in public life, freedom of expression, and personal safety. In order to fully understand the intricacies of online misogyny, social psychologists need to draw upon more directly on communications and media theories of mediated communication and connective action.

show abstract

Section: Emotional Capital Of Extreme Hostilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Communicating misogyny: An interdisciplinary research agenda for social psychology

Tileagă

2019

Social & Personality Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…First, we test whether the focus theory of norms applies in the context of political campaign incivility by examining whether individuals hold different injunctive and descriptive norms regarding candidate behaviors. Second, the project expands recent constructionist approaches to incivility, which posit that the speaker, message, audience, and other aspects of a context should affect perceptions of whether a behavior is "uncivil" (Jamieson et al, 2017;Sydnor, 2019b). Here, we ask whether candidates with different characteristics are held to different normative standards.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Descriptive and Injunctive Incivility Norms in Political Campaigns: Differences Across Behavior Type, Candidate Gender, and Candidate Party Position

Muddiman

Flores

Boyce

2021

American Behavioral Scientist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite evidence that a majority of people in the United States say that they want more civil politics, candidates still use incivility strategically during campaigns. Distinguishing between descriptive and injunctive norms may help explain this apparent contradiction. This study presents an experiment conducted with participants recruited at 2020 Democratic Iowa Caucus rallies that tested whether (a) individuals differ in their descriptive and injunctive normative beliefs about a variety of uncivil behaviors and (b) candidate characteristics such as gender and insider/outsider status in a party influence respondents’ normative beliefs. Findings suggest that, while descriptive and injunctive norms align for some campaign behaviors, they do not for all behaviors, such as sharing false information and using insults. Additionally, men and women candidates, as well as political insider and outsider candidates, are expected to behave differently but are held to the same injunctively normative standard when uncivil behaviors are attributed to them. Future incivility researchers should continue investigating descriptive and injunctive norms to investigate whether voters dismiss descriptively common behaviors during campaigns, even if they perceive those behaviors as inappropriate and uncivil.

show abstract

“…As such, this requires others to perceive and interpret the meaning of inter-personal exchanges and whether it conforms to commonly accepted behavioral norms. Consequently, most definitions of civility and incivility have an implicit subjectivity that relies on the perceptions of participants in exchanges to determine whether they conform to commonly held standards for appropriate discourse within context (Boatright, Shaffer, and Sobieraj 2019;Jamieson et al 2017;Strachan and Wolf 2012). Thus, in order to examine civility, we must recognize that it is rooted in perceptions of what are appropriate and normal ways to treat others, and these perceptions may differ across groups and geographies.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is It Us? Is It Them? Or Is It This Place? Predicting Civility in State Legislatures

Kettler

Fowler

Witt

2021

State Politics Policy Q.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While many scholars and analysts have observed a decline in civility in recent years, there have been few examinations of how political, economic, and institutional structures may partially explain inter-state differences in these trends. We suggest three potential explanations: (1) institutional structures, such as legislative professionalism and gubernatorial power, have created different contexts in which legislators build and maintain inter-personal relationships; (2) partisan competition has led to less bipartisan cooperation and contributed to strained relationships between members of different parties; and, (3) economic inequity and change has contributed to economic anxiety among citizens, contributing to conflict in legislative bodies as elected officials attempt to navigate emerging policy challenges. To test these explanations, we develop an innovative measure of civility using a national survey of lobbyists and a partial Multilevel Regression and Poststratification (MRP) design. Findings suggest that there is some validity to all three explanations, and signifying that civility is at least partially a result of structural issues.

show abstract

The Political Uses and Abuses of Civility and Incivility

Cited by 32 publications

References 15 publications

Communicating misogyny: An interdisciplinary research agenda for social psychology

Communicating misogyny: An interdisciplinary research agenda for social psychology

Descriptive and Injunctive Incivility Norms in Political Campaigns: Differences Across Behavior Type, Candidate Gender, and Candidate Party Position

Is It Us? Is It Them? Or Is It This Place? Predicting Civility in State Legislatures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About