The DOI matches its Crossref record; 65 of the 65 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Polarization in the contemporary political and media landscape
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Scholars have made the conceptual distinction between issue polarization—an ideological, policy-based political divide, and affective polarization, i.e. dislike, distrust, and general animosity of political partisans toward the other political side (5, 61, 62).”
From Troll and divide: the language of online polarization (2022) · cites this paper as [62]
Citations
Cites
Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(73)90033-9 · Cited by 9,984
The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States
Iyengar, S., Lelkes, Y., Levendusky, M., Malhotra, N., & Westwood, S. J. (2019) · Annual Review of Political Science · doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-051117-073034 · Cited by 3,603
Iyengar, S., Sood, G., & Lelkes, Y. (2012) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1093/poq/nfs038 · Cited by 2,996
Fear and loathing across party lines: New evidence on group polarization
Iyengar, S., & Westwood, S. J. (2015) · American Journal of Political Science · doi:10.1111/ajps.12152 · Cited by 2,452
Filter Bubbles, Echo Chambers, and Online News Consumption
Flaxman, S., Goel, S., & Rao, J. M. (2016) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1093/poq/nfw006 · Cited by 1,992
Exposure to opposing views on social media can increase political polarization
Bail, C. A., Argyle, L. P., Brown, T. W., Bumpus, J. P., Chen, H., Hunzaker, M. B. F., Lee, J., Mann, M., Merhout, F., & Volfovsky, A. (2018) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1804840115 · Cited by 1,863
Emotion shapes the diffusion of moralized content in social networks
Brady, W. J., Wills, J. A., Jost, J. T., Tucker, J. A., & Van Bavel, J. J. (2017) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1618923114 · Cited by 1,580
How Elite Partisan Polarization Affects Public Opinion Formation
DRUCKMAN, J. N., PETERSON, E., & SLOTHUUS, R. (2013) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055412000500 · Cited by 1,569
Party Over Policy: The Dominating Impact of Group Influence on Political Beliefs.
Cohen, G. L. (2003) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.5.808 · Cited by 1,400
Abramowitz, A. I., & Saunders, K. L. (2008) · The Journal of Politics · doi:10.1017/s0022381608080493 · Cited by 1,308
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Cognitive–motivational mechanisms of political polarization in social-communicative contexts
Jost, J. T., Baldassarri, D. S., & Druckman, J. N. (2022) · Nature Reviews Psychology · doi:10.1038/s44159-022-00093-5 · Cited by 276
Interventions to reduce partisan animosity
Hartman, R., Blakey, W., Womick, J., Bail, C., Finkel, E. J., Han, H., Sarrouf, J., Schroeder, J., Sheeran, P., Van Bavel, J. J., et al. (2022) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-022-01442-3 · Cited by 171
Correcting inaccurate metaperceptions reduces Americans’ support for partisan violence
Mernyk, J. S., Pink, S. L., Druckman, J. N., & Willer, R. (2022) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2116851119 · Cited by 146
Polarization in America: two possible futures
Heltzel, G., & Laurin, K. (2020) · Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.cobeha.2020.03.008 · Cited by 165
Algorithm-mediated social learning in online social networks
Brady, W. J., Jackson, J. C., Lindström, B., & Crockett, M. J. (2023) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2023.06.008 · Cited by 132
Metadata
- Authors
- Wilson, A. E., Parker, V. A., & Feinberg, M.
- Affiliations
- Wilfrid Laurier University (CA)
- University of Toronto (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Wilson, Anne E
- Venue
- Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2020-08
- Volume
- 34
- Pages
- 223-228
- ISSN
- 2352-1546 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3058235320
- Cited by
- 220
- References
- 64
- Citations by year
- 2026: 32 · 2025: 49 · 2024: 56 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 1
- FWCI
- 21.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Media Influence and Politics
- Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
- Keywords
- political polarization, affective polarization, ideological polarization, political elites, partisan media, social media dynamics
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
