Reinforcing spirals of political discussion and affective polarization
Abstract
Using the theoretical framework of the Reinforcing Spirals Model, we examine over-time relationships between partisan political discussion and affective political polarization using two three-wave datasets collected during the 2016 and 2012 US Presidential Elections. Our results during both election cycles indicated that higher levels of polarization at wave 1 were associated with an increased discussion with like-minded partners at wave 2, which was associated with higher levels of polarization at wave 3. In all, these findings demonstrate support that reinforcing spirals occur through partisan political discussion on affective partisan attitudes.
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?
Possessing ideologically homogeneous networks exacerbates issue and affective polarization, whereas having a heterogeneous network facilitates the correction of stereotypical misconceptions and decreases polarization.
“possessing ideologically homogeneous networks exacerbates issue and affective polarization, whereas having a heterogeneous network facilitates the correction of stereotypical misconceptions and decreases polarization223–227.”
From Cognitive–motivational mechanisms of political polarization in social-communicative contexts (2022) · cites this paper as [226]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 66 · Cited by 113
- Authors
- Hutchens, M. J., Hmielowski, J. D., & Beam, M. A.
- Affiliations
- University of Florida (US)
- Washington State University (US)
- Kent State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Hutchens, Myiah J.
- Venue
- Communication Monographs
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2019-02-21
- Volume
- 86
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 357-376
- ISSN
- 0363-7751 (ISSN-L)
- 1479-5787
- OpenAlex
- W2916476823
- Cited by
- 113
- References
- 66
- Citations by year
- 2026: 23 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 2
- FWCI
- 53.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Communication Monographs (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
- Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Media Influence and Politics
- Keywords
- social reinforcement, partisan attitudes, 2016 US presidential election, 2012 presidential election
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
