A sign of the times? Weak and strong polarization in the U.S. Congress, 1973–2016
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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?
There is a strong consensus among scholars of politics in the USA that liberal and conservative political elites have grown increasingly polarized over the past few decades.
“For example, there is a strong consensus among scholars of politics in the USA that liberal and conservative political elites (including members of Congress, party activists, donors and judicial appointees) have grown increasingly polarized over the past few decades27–34.”
From Cognitive–motivational mechanisms of political polarization in social-communicative contexts (2022) · cites this paper as [33]
Cites
Finding and evaluating community structure in networks
Newman, M. E. J., & Girvan, M. (2004) · Physical Review E · doi:10.1103/physreve.69.026113 · Cited by 13,931 · see citing works
Resolution limit in community detection
Fortunato, S., & Barthélemy, M. (2007) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0605965104 · Cited by 3,024 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
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 · see citing works
The prime psychological suspects of toxic political polarization
Moore-Berg, S. L., Hameiri, B., & Bruneau, E. (2020) · Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.cobeha.2020.05.001 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
Quantifying ideological polarization on a network using generalized Euclidean distance
Hohmann, M., Devriendt, K., & Coscia, M. (2023) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.abq2044 · Cited by 74 · see citing works
- Authors
- Neal, Z. P.
- Affiliations
- Michigan State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Neal, Zachary P.
- ORCID
- Neal, Zachary P.
- Venue
- Social Networks
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2020-01
- Volume
- 60
- Pages
- 103-112
- ISSN
- 0378-8733 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2894413073
- Cited by
- 109
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 3
- FWCI
- 28.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Social Networks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Opinion Dynamics and Social Influence
- Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
- Keywords
- political polarization, United States Congress, intergroup relations, signed networks, House of Representatives, Senate, political affiliation, majority party, legislative networks
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
