Was There a Culture War? Partisan Polarization and Secular Trends in US Public Opinion
Abstract
According to many scholars of public opinion, most of the fast-growing divides between Democrats and Republicans over the last few decades have taken place on moral issues. We find that the process of issue partisanship—the sorting of political preferences along partisan lines—properly accounts for public opinion dynamics in the economic and civil rights domains. However, when it comes to moral issues, the prominent change is a partisan secular trend, in which both Democrats and Republicans are adopting more progressive views, although at a different rate. While Democrats are early adopters of progressive views, Republicans adopt the same views at a slower pace. This secular change can be easily (mis)interpreted as a sign of polarization since, at the onset of the process, the gap between party supporters broadens because of the faster pace at which Democrats adopt progressive views, and only toward the end, the gap between partisan supporters decreases.
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?
The extent to which elite-level polarization has influenced the belief systems of ordinary citizens remains a matter of debate.
“At the same time, the extent to which elite-level polarization has influenced the belief systems of ordinary citizens remains a matter of debate8,27,35–40.”
From Cognitive–motivational mechanisms of political polarization in social-communicative contexts (2022) · cites this paper as [40]
Analyses of historical trends in public opinion from 1972 to 2016 reveal that Democrats were early adopters of more egalitarian views about gender, civil rights and gay rights, as well as more progressive on moral issues, whereas Republicans resisted these secular trends and were slower to change their attitudes.
“analyses of historical trends in public opinion from 1972 to 2016 reveal that Democrats were early adopters of more egalitarian views about gender, civil rights and gay rights, as well as more progressive on moral issues, whereas Republicans resisted these secular trends and were slower to change their attitudes40.”
From Cognitive–motivational mechanisms of political polarization in social-communicative contexts (2022) · cites this paper as [40]
In the USA, there are three major cleavages on economic, civil rights and moral issues, with the moral dimension largely crosscutting the other two dimensions.
“In the USA, there are three major cleavages on economic, civil rights and moral issues, with the moral dimension largely crosscutting the other two dimensions40,77.”
From Cognitive–motivational mechanisms of political polarization in social-communicative contexts (2022) · cites this paper as [40]
Cites
The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion
Zaller, J. R. (1992) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511818691 · Cited by 7,785 · see citing works
Activists and Conflict Extension in American Party Politics
LAYMAN, G. C., CARSEY, T. M., GREEN, J. C., HERRERA, R., & COOPERMAN, R. (2010) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s000305541000016x · Cited by 348 · see citing works
“It could turn ugly”: Selective disclosure of attitudes in political discussion networks
Cowan, S. K., & Baldassarri, D. (2018) · Social Networks · doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2017.04.002 · Cited by 169 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Cognitive–motivational mechanisms of political polarization in social-communicative contexts
Jost, J. T., Baldassarri, D. S., & Druckman, J. N. (2022) · Nature Reviews Psychology · doi:10.1038/s44159-022-00093-5 · Cited by 276 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Baldassarri, D., & Park, B.
- Affiliations
- New York University (US)
- ORCID
- Baldassarri, Delia
- Venue
- The Journal of Politics
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 2020-07
- Volume
- 82
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 809-827
- ISSN
- 0022-3816 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-2508
- OpenAlex
- W2990632962
- Cited by
- 115
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 6
- FWCI
- 40.19
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The Journal of Politics (publishedVersion)
- Archivio istituzionale della Ricerca - Bocconi (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Religion and Society Interactions
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History › American Political and Social Dynamics
- Keywords
- partisan polarization, secular trends, public opinion change, ethical considerations, economic attitudes, Democrats and Republicans, progressive attitudes, partisan sorting
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
