CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 10Electoral Systems and Political ParticipationAmerican Political and Social DynamicsPopulism, Right-Wing Movements

The Political Dynamics of Partisan Polarization

Schmidt, Eric R., Carmines, Edward G., Sniderman, Paul M.·2025·Cambridge University Press eBooks
DOI 10.1017/9781009472760
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This is a study of the dynamics of partisan polarization in the United States. It has three objectives: (1) to identify and explain why some Republicans and Democrats – but not others – have polarized, particularly over the last twenty years; (2) to demonstrate that they have done so not on this or that issue but systematically, programmatically – domain versus issue sorting; and (3) to bring into the open profound asymmetries in polarization between the two parties, not least that Republicans polarized early and thoroughly on issues of race, while Democrats in the largest number stayed neutral or even conservative until only recently. Emerging from the reasoning and results is a revised theory of party identification that specifies the conditions under which ordinary Republicans and Democrats can become ideological partisans – real-life conservatives and liberals in their behavior – in the choices they make on candidates, policies, and parties.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/9781009472760

Cites

111 of 111 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • The evidence suggests partisan differences in affective polarization are less a psychological than a political question.

    “Finally, returning to the question of when partisan differences in affective polarization manifest, the evidence suggests it is less a psychological than a political question (Schmidt et al., 2025).”

    From Measuring affective polarization: Matching concepts to measures (2026) · cites this paper as Schmidt et al., 2025

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 112 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Schmidt, E. R., Carmines, E. G., & Sniderman, P. M.
Affiliations
  • Millsaps College (US)
  • Indiana University (US)
  • Stanford University (US)
ORCID
Venue
Cambridge University Press eBooks
Publisher
Cambridge University Press
Published
2025-03-20
DOI
10.1017/9781009472760
OpenAlex
W4408600656
Cited by
10
References
112
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 6
FWCI
26.59
Type
book
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.cambridge.org/core/terms (unspecified)
Locations
Cambridge University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
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 › Political Science and International Relations › Populism, Right-Wing Movements
Keywords
partisan polarization, party identification, ideological partisanship, Republicans, Democrats, race relations, party ideology, American politics

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