CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 58Electoral Systems and Political ParticipationAmerican Political and Social DynamicsMedia Influence and Politics

Issue alignment and partisanship in the American public: Revisiting the ‘partisans without constraint’ thesis

Open access
Kozlowski, Austin C., Murphy, James P.·2021·Social Science Research
DOI 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2020.102498
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Prior studies of American polarization suggest that the public gradually sorted themselves into partisan camps in the late 20th century while remaining largely non-ideological. Drawing on more recent data, we reassess these trends and discover a striking increase in the ideological organization of American public opinion in the beginning of the 21st century. Using a broad set of issues from the American National Election Studies, we identify rapid growth in the correlations between political attitudes from 2004 to 2016. This emergence of issue alignment is most pronounced within the economic and civil rights domains, challenging the notion that current "culture wars" are grounded in moral issues. While elite subpopulations show the greatest gains, we find that economic issues become more highly correlated across the electorate. We also find accelerated growth in the association between partisanship and issue attitudes during this period. These findings paint a new picture of the American electorate as not only highly partisan but increasingly ideological.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2020.102498

Cites

63 of 63 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Sometimes multiple lines of potential disagreement in society become highly overlapping, aligned or consolidated, reducing multiple potential cleavages to a single dimension that dominates political relations.

    “Sometimes multiple lines of potential disagreement in society become highly overlapping, aligned or consolidated. In these cases, multiple potential cleavages might be reduced to a single dimension that comes to dominate political relations8,72,77,78.”

    From Cognitive–motivational mechanisms of political polarization in social-communicative contexts (2022) · cites this paper as [78]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 64 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Kozlowski, A. C., & Murphy, J. P.
Affiliations
  • University of Chicago (US)
  • Northwestern University (US)
Corresponding author
Kozlowski, Austin C.
ORCID
Venue
Social Science Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-02
Volume
94
Pages
102498
ISSN
0049-089X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.ssresearch.2020.102498
OpenAlex
W3110361442
Cited by
58
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 6
FWCI
25.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Social Science Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • SocArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • SocArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History › American Political and Social Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Media Influence and Politics
Keywords
partisanship, political ideology, public opinion, political polarization, culture wars, economic attitudes, American electorate
MeSH terms
Attitude, Humans, Politics, Public Opinion, United States

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