CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,367Electoral Systems and Political ParticipationSocial Media and PoliticsPolitical Theory and Democracy

“I Disrespectfully Agree”: The Differential Effects of Partisan Sorting on Social and Issue Polarization

Mason, Lilliana·2015·American Journal of Political Science
DOI 10.1111/ajps.12089
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Disagreements over whether polarization exists in the mass public have confounded two separate types of polarization. When social polarization is separated from issue position polarization, both sides of the polarization debate can be simultaneously correct. Social polarization, characterized by increased levels of partisan bias, activism, and anger, is increasing, driven by partisan identity and political identity alignment, and does not require the same magnitude of issue position polarization. The partisan‐ideological sorting that has occurred in recent decades has caused the nation as a whole to hold more aligned political identities, which has strengthened partisan identity and the activism, bias, and anger that result from strong identities, even though issue positions have not undergone the same degree of polarization. The result is a nation that agrees on many things but is bitterly divided nonetheless. An examination of ANES data finds strong support for these hypotheses.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/ajps.12089

Cites

63 of 63 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?

  • Other authors in the specialized literature have called the phenomenon 'social polarization'.

    “Otros autores en la literatura especializada del área han llamado al fenómeno”

    From El estudio de la polarización afectiva: una mirada metodológica (2022) · cites this paper as Mason, 2015

  • Partisanship is emerging as an important social identity under which many societal divisions and conflicts are coming to align.

    “Many scholars link these negative feelings to shifts in identity, with partisanship emerging as an important social identity under which many societal divisions and conflicts are coming to align (15–18).”

    From How digital media drive affective polarization through partisan sorting (2022) · cites this paper as [17]

  • Affective polarization is largely distinct from the ideological divide.

    “Rather, we argue that affective polarization is largely distinct from the ideological divide”

    From The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States (2019) · cites this paper as Mason 2015

  • Extremity in issue opinions is not a necessary condition for affective polarization.

    “and that extremity in issue opinions is not a necessary condition for affective polarization”

    From The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States (2019) · cites this paper as Mason 2015

  • The literature on mass political polarization in the USA has yielded mixed findings about whether ordinary citizens are deeply divided, whether polarization threatens democratic functioning, and the nature of the threat.

    “The body of literature on mass political polarization in the USA has yielded mixed findings: ordinary citizens are deeply divided9,31,35,41–49 or they are not10,29,36,50–54; polarization poses a huge threat to democratic functioning3,11,55, is not a problem at all13,56–58 or the nature of the threat is ambiguous7,59,60.”

    From Cognitive–motivational mechanisms of political polarization in social-communicative contexts (2022) · cites this paper as [45]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Campbell Angus, 1960, The American Voter
  2. Fiorina Morris P., 2006, Red and Blue Nation? Characteristics and Causes of America's Polarized Politics, 49
  3. Jacobson Gary C., 2006, Red and Blue Nation? Characteristics and Causes of America's Polarized Politics, 85
  4. Jacobson Gary C., 2007, A Divider, Not a Uniter
  5. Nordlinger Eric, 1972, Conflict Regulation in Divided Societies
  6. Tajfel Henri, 1981, Human Groups and Social Categories

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Mason, L.
Affiliations
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US)
Corresponding author
Mason, Lilliana
ORCID
Mason, Lilliana
Venue
American Journal of Political Science
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-03-25
Volume
59
Issue
1
Pages
128-145
ISSN
  • 0092-5853 (ISSN-L)
  • 1540-5907
DOI
10.1111/ajps.12089
OpenAlex
W1595106591
Semantic Scholar
26a21eac8be08d65b0dfbac3aaf8041f26bb2520
Cited by
1,367
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 120 · 2025: 171 · 2024: 139 · 2023: 142 · 2022: 154 · 2021: 156 · 2020: 158 · 2019: 133 · 2018: 93 · 2017: 50 · 2016: 33 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 1
FWCI
219.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Locations
American Journal of Political Science (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Theory and Democracy
Keywords
social polarization, partisan sorting, partisan identity, partisan bias, political activism, political anger, public opinion, American National Election Studies

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