CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 12Social and Intergroup PsychologyNames, Identity, and Discrimination ResearchExperimental Behavioral Economics Studies

The normative permissiveness of political partyism

Open access
Lane, Tom, Miller, Luis, Rodriguez, Isabel·2024·European Economic Review
DOI 10.1016/j.euroecorev.2023.104661
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Political party identity has become one of the strongest social divides within many Western societies. This paper employs experiments to measure discrimination along different dimensions of social identity, and replicates previous findings showing the strongest discrimination against out-groups occurs in the political party domain. Moreover, we explore a possible explanation for this phenomenon based on social norms. We measure the social appropriateness of discrimination along each identity dimension. The ranking of dimensions by discrimination against out-groups reflects the extent to which such behaviour is normatively permissible, with the weakest anti-discrimination norms on the political party dimension. Results are qualitatively similar in two European countries. We argue that, while strong norms sanctioning discrimination on other dimensions have developed historically, no such process has taken place concerning party affiliation, bringing partisan identity to the fore and helping polarisation flourish.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.euroecorev.2023.104661

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The effect of perceived polarization on affective polarization may play out through the framework of social norms.

    “we argue that the effect of perceived polarization on affective polarization may play out through the framework of social norms (Connors, 2023;Lane et al., 2024).”

    From ¿Demasiado lejos? Cómo la polarización mal percibida alimenta la polarización afectiva en España (2025) · cites this paper as Lane et al., 2024

    The Introduction (page unavailable) proposes social norms as one explanation for party affective polarization, and the Discussion (page unavailable) explores norms as a mechanism in political polarization. The passages do not address whether perceived polarization affects affective polarization through social norms, so they support the proposed framework but not that specific pathway. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 32 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Bicchieri, C., 2005. The grammar of society: The nature and dynamics of social norms. Cambridge University Press.
  2. Fallucchi, F., Nosenzo, D., 2022. The coordinating power of social norms. Exp. Econ. 25 (1), 1-25.
  3. Schelling, T.C., 1980. The Strategy of Conflict. Harvard university press.
  4. Sunstein, C.R., 2016. Partyism. Univ. Chicago Leg. For. 2015 (2), 1-26.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Lane, T., Miller, L., & Rodriguez, I.
Affiliations
  • Newcastle University (GB)
  • Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (ES)
Corresponding author
Miller, Luis
ORCID
Venue
European Economic Review
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2024-02
Volume
162
Pages
104661
ISSN
0014-2921 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.euroecorev.2023.104661
OpenAlex
W4390571053
Cited by
12
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 4
FWCI
8.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • European Economic Review (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DIGITAL.CSIC (Spanish National Research Council (CSIC)) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Econstor (Econstor) (submittedVersion)
  • Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity) (cc-by)
Funders
Fundación BBVA
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Names, Identity, and Discrimination Research
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
Keywords
social identity, discrimination, outgroup, social norms, political polarization, social identity theory, partisan identity

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