Cited by 186Electoral Systems and Political ParticipationAmerican Political and Social DynamicsReligion and Society Interactions

Neither Ideologues nor Agnostics: Alternative Voters’ Belief System in an Age of Partisan Politics

Open access
Baldassarri, Delia, Goldberg, Amir·2014·American Journal of Sociology

Abstract

How do Americans organize their political beliefs? This article argues that party polarization and the growing prominence of moral issues in recent decades have catalyzed different responses by different groups of Americans. The article investigates systematic heterogeneity in the organization of political attitudes using relational class analysis, a graph-based method for detecting multiple patterns of opinion in survey data. Three subpopulations, each characterized by a distinctive way of organizing its political beliefs, are identified: ideologues, whose political attitudes strongly align with either liberal or conservative categories; alternatives, who are instead morally conservative but economically liberal, or vice versa; and agnostics, who exhibit weak associations between political beliefs. Individuals' sociodemographic profiles, particularly their income, education, and religiosity, lie at the core of the different ways in which they understand politics. Results show that while ideologues have gone through a process of issue alignment, alternatives have grown increasingly apart from the political agendas of both parties. The conflictual presence of conservative and liberal preferences has often been resolved by alternative voters in favor of the Republican Party.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/676042

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • In complex societies, sorting along socio-demographic characteristics is unlikely to bring about complete ideological isolation because most people have crosscutting identities.

    “In complex societies, sorting along socio-demographic characteristics is unlikely to bring about complete ideological isolation. This is because most people have crosscutting identities.”

    From Cognitive–motivational mechanisms of political polarization in social-communicative contexts (2022) · cites this paper as [222]

    The retrieved passages contain repository metadata and a PDF listing, but no substantive passage about ideological isolation. Searches for socio-demographic sorting, ideological segregation, and crosscutting identities returned no relevant text from the paper, so the claim cannot be checked against our copy. (LLM, conf=0.74)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 76 · Cited by 186

Authors
Baldassarri, D., & Goldberg, A.
Affiliations
  • New York University (US)
  • Stanford University (US)
Venue
American Journal of Sociology
Published
2014-07
Volume
120
Issue
1
Pages
45-95
ISSN
  • 0002-9602 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-5390
OpenAlex
W2017450497
Cited by
186
References
76
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 3
FWCI
47.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • American Journal of Sociology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Archivio istituzionale della Ricerca - Bocconi (submittedVersion, other-oa)
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 › Religion and Society Interactions
Keywords
political ideology, partisanship, partisan polarization, ethical considerations, ideological heterogeneity, moral conservatism, economic liberalism, religiosity, education and income, Republican Party
MeSH terms
Attitude, Culture, Humans, Politics, 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