The Psychological Sources of Partisan-leaning Independence

Abstract

In the traditional 7-point scale of partisanship, individuals classified as partisan leaners present a unique anomaly. These individuals self-classify themselves as politically independent, yet admit to preferring one political party over the other when probed. Previous research has shown that these partisan leaners are not demonstrably different from avowed partisans in either the attitudinal or behavioral support for their preferred party. Why these individuals should be partisan in attitudes and behaviors yet still consider themselves independents has not been adequately examined and raises important questions about our current understanding of partisanship. Using a unique psychological survey of voting-age adults, I find that leaners are different from true partisans in four areas: relatively less emphasis on affect and more emphasis on cognition in partisan attitudes; less partisan social identity, but heightened independent social identity; different patterns of parental socialization; and more negative attitudes toward parties in general.

Exploring the Attitudinal Structure of Partisanship

“…In actuality, it depends on the intensity of social identification with the party. These findings also comport with Greene's (2000) results showing cognitive dominance among strong partisans.…”

Social Identity Theory and Party Identification*

“…The examination of separate partisan and independent social identities yields important insight into the problem of intransitivities in the traditional measure of partisanship (see also Greene, 2000). The patterns for both partisan and independent social identity help to explain why leaners choose to identify as independents.…”

“…As hypothesized earlier, a social identity perspective including partisan and independent social identifications can potentially bring further understanding to the traditional seven‐point party identification scale, especially regarding intransitivities (Greene, 2000; Keith et al, 1992; Petrocik, 1974). To examine the relationship between social identity and the traditional party identification scale, I conducted simple comparisons of means and t ‐tests for the four categories of partisan strength (pure independent, leaner, weak partisan, strong partisan).…”

Party Identification in Emotional and Political Context: A Replication

“…Levels of anxiety were moderate, and widely dispersed across the resulting 13‐point scale ( M = .44, SD = .33, Cronbach's α = .79). While others have used such measures to compare affective to cognitive dispositions toward the parties (Greene, 2000, 2002; Greene & Elder, 2001; Roscoe & Christiansen, 2001; Weisberg & Hasecke, 1999), this will be the first test of the role of anxiety as outlined above. Additional measures used below include the response times, a question about the amount of attention paid to political news, and approval ratings and vote inclinations for several political figures (see ).…”