CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 874Electoral Systems and Political ParticipationMedia Influence and PoliticsAmerican Political and Social Dynamics

Partisans without Constraint: Political Polarization and Trends in American Public Opinion

Baldassarri, Delia, Gelman, Andrew·2008·American Journal of Sociology
DOI 10.1086/590649
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Public opinion polarization is here conceived as a process of alignment along multiple lines of potential disagreement and measured as growing constraint in individuals' preferences. Using NES data from 1972 to 2004, the authors model trends in issue partisanship—the correlation of issue attitudes with party identification—and issue alignment—the correlation between pairs of issues—and find a substantive increase in issue partisanship, but little evidence of issue alignment. The findings suggest that opinion changes correspond more to a resorting of party labels among voters than to greater constraint on issue attitudes: since parties are more polarized, they are now better at sorting individuals along ideological lines. Levels of constraint vary across population subgroups: strong partisans and wealthier and politically sophisticated voters have grown more coherent in their beliefs. The authors discuss the consequences of partisan realignment and group sorting on the political process and potential deviations from the classic pluralistic account of American politics.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/590649

Cites

74 of 74 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?

  • Increasing the number of dimensions expands polarization into additional distinct senses, such as the correlation of attitudes across multiple issue dimensions, which are only sensible for higher-dimensional data.

    “Furthermore, increasing the number of dimensions also expands polarization into additional distinct senses; i.e., there are types of polarization (such as the correlation of attitudes across multiple issue dimensions (Baldassarri & Gelman, 2008;Fiorina et al., 2010)) that are only sensible for higher-dimensional data.”

    From Disambiguation of social polarization concepts and measures (2016) · cites this paper as Baldassarri & Gelman, 2008

  • Previous work on polarization often fails to systematically distinguish the specific ways in which polarization is realized.

    “Occurrences of polarization frequently appear in the sociology and political science literature (Baldassarri & Gelman, 2008;Bartels, 2000;Brownstein, 2007;DiMaggio, Evans, & Bryson, 1996;Fiorina, Abrams, & Pope, 2010;Hetherington & Weiler, 2009;Hunter, 1991;McCarty, Poole, & Rosenthal, 2008), but the specific ways in which polarization is realized are not systematically distinguished.”

    From Disambiguation of social polarization concepts and measures (2016) · cites this paper as Baldassarri & Gelman, 2008

  • Democrats have lost constraint on economic and civil rights issues and become a bit more coherent in their moral views.

    “In fact, Republicans have become more consistent on economic and civil rights issues, while Democrats have lost constraint on these issues and become a bit more coherent in their moral views.”

    From Disambiguation of social polarization concepts and measures (2016) · cites this paper as Baldassarri & Gelman, 2008

  • In both groups of voters, the constraint is growing faster than in the populace as a whole.

    “In both groups of voters, the constraint is growing faster than in the populace as a whole”

    From Disambiguation of social polarization concepts and measures (2016) · cites this paper as Baldassarri & Gelman, 2008

  • Republicans have become more consistent on economic and civil rights issues.

    “In fact, Republicans have become more consistent on economic and civil rights issues, while Democrats have lost constraint on these issues and become a bit more coherent in their moral views.”

    From Disambiguation of social polarization concepts and measures (2016) · cites this paper as Baldassarri & Gelman, 2008

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 27

  1. Ansolabehere Stephen, 2006, Jr.
  2. Bafumi Joseph, meeting of the American Political Science Association
  3. Bafumi Joseph, 2007, Shapiro
  4. Baldassarri Delia, Working paper
  5. Blau Peter M, 1984, Schwartz
  6. Brady David W, 2006, Han
  7. Carmines Edward G, 1989, Stimson
  8. Converse Philip E, Pp. 206–61 in Ideology and Discontent, edited by David Apter.
  9. Fiorina Morris P, 2005, Pope
  10. Galston William, Liberal Pluralism
  11. Gelman Andrew, Blue State, Rich State
  12. Katz Elihu, 1955, Lazarsfeld
  13. Kohut Andrew, 2000, Toth
  14. Levendusky Matt, meeting of the American Political Science Association
  15. Lipset Seymour M, Political Man
  16. Lipset Seymour M, Pp. 1–64 in Party System and Voter Alignments, edited by Seymour M. Lipset and Stein Rokkan.
  17. Lipset Seymour M, 1956, Coleman
  18. Lowi Theodore J, The End of Liberalism
  19. Lupia Arthur, 2000, Popkin
  20. Mills C. Wright., 1956, New York: Oxford University Press.
  21. Poole Keith T, Ideology and Congress
  22. Shapiro Robert Y, conference of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, Montreal, May.
  23. Simmel Georg, 1908, New York: Free Press.
  24. Sniderman Paul M, 1991, Tetlock
  25. Snijders Tom A. B., 1999, Bosker
  26. Truman David, The Governmental Process
  27. Wilcox Clyde, The Latest American Revolution? The 1994 Elections and Their Implications for Governance

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Baldassarri, D., & Gelman, A.
Affiliations
  • Princeton University (US)
  • Columbia University (US)
ORCID
Venue
American Journal of Sociology
Publisher
University of Chicago Press
Published
2008-09
Volume
114
Issue
2
Pages
408-446
ISSN
  • 0002-9602 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-5390
DOI
10.1086/590649
OpenAlex
W3125647857
Semantic Scholar
35ed340b12c10a5a66504cb2396800486fa5aa26
Cited by
874
References
74
Citations by year
2026: 46 · 2025: 92 · 2024: 73 · 2023: 64 · 2022: 77 · 2021: 77 · 2020: 80 · 2019: 79 · 2018: 59 · 2017: 41 · 2016: 33 · 2015: 38 · 2014: 29 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 29
FWCI
87.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
American Journal of Sociology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Media Influence and Politics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History › American Political and Social Dynamics
Keywords
political polarization, public opinion trends, party identification, ideological sorting, party realignment, political sophistication

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