The DOI matches its Crossref record; 74 of the 76 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Fear and Loathing across Party Lines: New Evidence on Group Polarization
Abstract
When defined in terms of social identity and affect toward copartisans and opposing partisans, the polarization of the American electorate has dramatically increased. We document the scope and consequences of affective polarization of partisans using implicit, explicit, and behavioral indicators. Our evidence demonstrates that hostile feelings for the opposing party are ingrained or automatic in voters' minds, and that affective polarization based on party is just as strong as polarization based on race. We further show that party cues exert powerful effects on nonpolitical judgments and behaviors. Partisans discriminate against opposing partisans, doing so to a degree that exceeds discrimination based on race. We note that the willingness of partisans to display open animus for opposing partisans can be attributed to the absence of norms governing the expression of negative sentiment and that increased partisan affect provides an incentive for elites to engage in confrontation rather than cooperation.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“In the political domain, there is ample evidence that affective polarization is on the rise (Finkel et al. 2020, Iyengar & Westwood 2015), leading to concerns about reduced support for democratic norms (Broockman et al. 2022, Kingzette et al. 2021).”
From Social Media and Morality. (2024) · cites this paper as Iyengar & Westwood 2015
In the citing paper
“Some studies have found that polarization includes affective aspects related to ideology that foster the difference between groups, favoring severe divisions between us and them.”
From La ideología política, las creencias sociales y la polarización como obstáculos psicosociales para la democracia y la paz en Colombia, 2016-2020 (2024) · cites this paper as Iyengar & Westwood, 2015
In the citing paper
“For various authors, it is an affective polarization associated with social beliefs and the configuration of the other as an enemy or adversary.”
From La ideología política, las creencias sociales y la polarización como obstáculos psicosociales para la democracia y la paz en Colombia, 2016-2020 (2024) · cites this paper as Iyengar & Westwood, 2015
In the citing paper
“This is because personalistic links are established with electoral candidates that lead to a consideration of the other as an enemy.”
From La ideología política, las creencias sociales y la polarización como obstáculos psicosociales para la democracia y la paz en Colombia, 2016-2020 (2024) · cites this paper as Iyengar & Westwood, 2015
In the citing paper
“Hence, polarization has an emotional and affective dimension that unfolds in social life and everyday relationships and goes beyond ideological opposition.”
From La ideología política, las creencias sociales y la polarización como obstáculos psicosociales para la democracia y la paz en Colombia, 2016-2020 (2024) · cites this paper as Iyengar & Westwood, 2015
In the citing paper
“This results in moral disqualification of the opponent, oversimplification of their position, exacerbation of disputes in everyday interactions, and personalization of political events.”
From La ideología política, las creencias sociales y la polarización como obstáculos psicosociales para la democracia y la paz en Colombia, 2016-2020 (2024) · cites this paper as Iyengar & Westwood, 2015
In the citing paper
“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 [16]
In the citing paper
“Iyengar and Westwood (2015) use trust and dictator games to show people discriminate against those from other parties more than they do toward people of different races (also see Carlin & Love, 2013, 2018;Whitt et al., 2024).”
From Measuring affective polarization: Matching concepts to measures (2026) · cites this paper as Iyengar and Westwood (2015)
In the citing paper
“From a social identity perspective, affective polarization is a natural offshoot of this sense of partisan group identity”
From The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States (2019) · cites this paper as Iyengar & Westwood 2015
In the citing paper
“The results indicated little racial bias; whites, in fact, preferred the African American applicant (55.8%).”
From The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States (2019) · cites this paper as Iyengar & Westwood 2015
In the citing paper
“The difference in the D-score-the operational indicator of implicit bias-across the party divide was 0.50, while the corresponding difference in implicit racial bias across the racial divide was only 0.18 (see also Theodoridis 2017 for an application of implicit measures to the study of partisanship).”
From The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States (2019) · cites this paper as Iyengar & Westwood 2015
In the citing paper
“Relative to implicit racial bias, implicit partisan bias is more widespread.”
From The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States (2019) · cites this paper as Iyengar & Westwood 2015
In the citing paper
“Results show that copartisans consistently receive a bonus while opposing partisans are subject to a financial penalty.”
From The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States (2019) · cites this paper as Iyengar & Westwood 2015
In the citing paper
“Interestingly, implicit bias is less pronounced than explicit bias as measured through survey questions; 91% of Republicans and 75% of Democrats in the same study explicitly evaluated their party more favorably.”
From The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States (2019) · cites this paper as Iyengar & Westwood 2015
In the citing paper
“But 79.2% of Democrats picked the Democratic applicant and 80% of Republicans picked the Republican applicant.”
From The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States (2019) · cites this paper as Iyengar & Westwood 2015
In the citing paper
“Their results showed that implicit bias is ingrained; approximately 70% of Democrats and Republicans show a bias in favor of their party.”
From The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States (2019) · cites this paper as Iyengar & Westwood 2015
In the citing paper
“These results held even when the out-party candidate had a significantly higher grade point average (4.0 versus 3.5); the probability of a partisan selecting the more qualified out-party candidate was never above 30%.”
From The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States (2019) · cites this paper as Iyengar & Westwood 2015
In the citing paper
“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 [44]
Citations
Cites
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences
Muller, K. E., & Cohen, J. (1989) · Technometrics · doi:10.2307/1270020 · Cited by 99,603
Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences
Cohen, J. (1990) · Computers Environment and Urban Systems · doi:10.1016/0198-9715(90)90050-4 · Cited by 65,417
An Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (2000) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780199269464.003.0005 · Cited by 12,701
The Social psychology of intergroup relations
Austin, W. G., & Worchel, S. (1979) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 11,577
Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: the implicit association test
Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. K. (1998) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.74.6.1464 · Cited by 9,210
Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes
Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (1995) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.102.1.4 · Cited by 6,682
Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: I. An improved scoring algorithm.
Greenwald, A. G., Nosek, B. A., & Banaji, M. R. (2003) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.197 · Cited by 5,815
Trust, Reciprocity, and Social History
Berg, J., Dickhaut, J., & McCabe, K. (1995) · Games and Economic Behavior · doi:10.1006/game.1995.1027 · Cited by 5,548
Political conservatism as motivated social cognition.
Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. J. (2003) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.3.339 · Cited by 4,904 · cited 1×
“Previous research suggests stronger bias against the outgroup among Republicans and conservatives (Jost et al. 2003; Jost, Hennes, and Lavine 2013; Stern et al. 2012), but our evidence indicates that the polarization scores (both explicit and implicit) for partisans on the left and right were generally indistinguishab…”
ResultWhat Americans Know about Politics and Why It Matters
Carpini, M. X. D., & Keeter, S. (1996) · Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.2307/2655098 · Cited by 4,864
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Campbell Angus, 1960, The American Voter
- Korte Gregory, 2012, Obama Has Edge in Political Merchandise, USA Today
- Rosenfeld Michael J., 2011, How Couples Meet and Stay Together, Waves 1, 2, and 3: Public Version 3.04
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 301–400 of 1,009
Ideological Fit Enhances Interpersonal Orientations
Chopik, W. J., & Motyl, M. S. (2016) · Social Psychological and Personality Science · doi:10.1177/1948550616658096 · Cited by 53
The role of political affiliation in employment decisions: A model and research agenda.
Roth, P. L., Goldberg, C., & Thatcher, J. B. (2017) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/apl0000232 · Cited by 57
Polarization and partisanship: Key drivers of distrust in media old and new?
Suiter, J., & Fletcher, R. (2020) · European Journal of Communication · doi:10.1177/0267323120903685 · Cited by 52
Ideological diversity, hostility, and discrimination in philosophy
Peters, U., Honeycutt, N., BLOCK, A. D., & Jussim, L. J. (2020) · Philosophical Psychology · doi:10.1080/09515089.2020.1743257 · Cited by 52
Polarized Networks? New Evidence on American Voters’ Political Discussion Networks
Butters, R., & Hare, C. (2020) · Political Behavior · doi:10.1007/s11109-020-09647-w · Cited by 40
Yang, S., Krause, N. M., Bao, L., Calice, M. N., Newman, T. P., Scheufele, D. A., Xenos, M. A., & Brossard, D. (2023) · Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly · doi:10.1177/10776990231190868 · Cited by 52
Jost, J. T. (2017) · Journal of Consumer Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jcps.2017.08.004 · Cited by 52
Duyn, E. V. (2021) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197557013.001.0001 · Cited by 51
Doxing democracy: influencing elections via cyber voter interference
Hansen, I., & Lim, D. J. (2018) · Contemporary Politics · doi:10.1080/13569775.2018.1493629 · Cited by 60
An agent-based model of multi-dimensional opinion dynamics and opinion alignment
Schweighofer, S., García, D., & Schweitzer, F. (2020) · Chaos An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science · doi:10.1063/5.0007523 · Cited by 55
Senators at Home: Local Attentiveness and Policy Representation in Congress
Kaslovsky, J. (2021) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055421001088 · Cited by 50
The Kids Are Online: Teen Social Media Use, Civic Engagement, and Affective Polarization
Oden, A., & Porter, L. (2023) · Social Media + Society · doi:10.1177/20563051231186364 · Cited by 71
Casey, J. P., Vanman, E. J., & Barlow, F. K. (2023) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/01461672231198001 · Cited by 54
Social structure learning in human anterior insula
Lau, T., Gershman, S. J., & Cikara, M. (2020) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.53162 · Cited by 53
(2017) · International journal of communication · Cited by 49
Lee, A. H. (2020) · Political Communication · doi:10.1080/10584609.2020.1799124 · Cited by 49
Emotion and Political Psychology
Gadarian, S. K., & Brader, T. A. (2023) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780197541302.013.5 · Cited by 54
The Electoral Landscape of 2016
Sides, J. M., Tesler, M., & Vavreck, L. (2016) · The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science · doi:10.1177/0002716216658922 · Cited by 50
Mayer, A. (2018) · Energy Research & Social Science · doi:10.1016/j.erss.2018.11.020 · Cited by 49
A new, online culture war? The communication world of Breitbart.com
Davis, M. (2019) · Communication Research and Practice · doi:10.1080/22041451.2018.1558790 · Cited by 52
Polarization and correct voting in U.S. presidential elections
Pierce, D. R., & Lau, R. R. (2019) · Electoral Studies · doi:10.1016/j.electstud.2019.102048 · Cited by 52
Value extremity contributes to affective polarization in the US
Enders, A. M., & Lupton, R. N. (2021) · Political Science Research and Methods · doi:10.1017/psrm.2020.27 · Cited by 48
Levendusky, M. S., & Stecula, D. A. (2021) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781009042192 · Cited by 56
Busby, E. C., Howat, A. J., Rothschild, J. E., & Shafranek, R. M. (2021) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781009086462 · Cited by 48
Political Polarization and Finance
Kempf, E., & Tsoutsoura, M. (2024) · Annual Review of Financial Economics · doi:10.1146/annurev-financial-110921-010439 · Cited by 55
Authoritarianism and Affective Polarization
Luttig, M. D. (2017) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1093/poq/nfx023 · Cited by 53
Growing Apart? Partisan Sorting in Canada, 1992–2015
Kevins, A., & Soroka, S. (2017) · Canadian Journal of Political Science · doi:10.1017/s0008423917000713 · Cited by 51
Wojcieszak, M., Winter, S., & Yu, X. (2020) · Mass Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/15205436.2020.1714663 · Cited by 47
Sorting the News: How Ranking by Popularity Polarizes Our Politics
Shmargad, Y., & Klar, S. (2020) · Political Communication · doi:10.1080/10584609.2020.1713267 · Cited by 50
The Democracy of Dating: How Political Affiliations Shape Relationship Formation
Easton, M. J., & Holbein, J. B. (2020) · Journal of Experimental Political Science · doi:10.1017/xps.2020.21 · Cited by 50
Rogers, N., & Jones, J. J. (2021) · Journal of Social Computing · doi:10.23919/jsc.2021.0002 · Cited by 47
Online clustering, fear and uncertainty in Egypt’s transition
Lynch, M., Freelon, D., & Aday, S. (2017) · Democratization · doi:10.1080/13510347.2017.1289179 · Cited by 46
The Stakes of Symbolic Boundaries
Edgell, P., Stewart, E. M., Billups, S. C., & Larson, R. (2019) · Sociological Quarterly · doi:10.1080/00380253.2019.1625736 · Cited by 46
Children’s Views of the American Presidency
Oxley, Z. M., Holman, M. R., Greenlee, J. S., Bos, A. L., & Lay, J. C. (2020) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1093/poq/nfaa007 · Cited by 46
Han, J., & Federico, C. M. (2018) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1093/joc/jqy025 · Cited by 55
Perception of public opinion on global warming and the role of opinion deviance
Abeles, A. T., Howe, L., Krosnick, J., & MacInnis, B. (2019) · Journal of Environmental Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2019.04.001 · Cited by 40
Finding Partisanship Where We Least Expect it: Evidence of Partisan Bias in a New African Democracy
Carlson, E. (2015) · Political Behavior · doi:10.1007/s11109-015-9309-5 · Cited by 47
Robbins, B. G., & Kiser, E. V. (2020) · Social Science Research · doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2020.102448 · Cited by 60
Vallier, K. (2020) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190887223.001.0001 · Cited by 45
Yu, X., Wojcieszak, M., & Casas, A. (2023) · Political Behavior · doi:10.1007/s11109-022-09850-x · Cited by 66
Brown, J. R., Enos, R. D., Feigenbaum, J., & Mazumder, S. (2021) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.abe8432 · Cited by 44
Seeing Spots: Partisanship, Negativity and the Conditional Receipt of Campaign Advertisements
Henderson, J. A., & Theodoridis, A. G. (2017) · Political Behavior · doi:10.1007/s11109-017-9432-6 · Cited by 42
Loyalty over Fairness: Acceptance of Unfair Supreme Court Procedures
Armaly, M. (2020) · Political Research Quarterly · doi:10.1177/1065912920944470 · Cited by 50
Weismueller, J., Gruner, R. L., Harrigan, P., Coussement, K., & Wang, S. (2023) · Information Systems Journal · doi:10.1111/isj.12453 · Cited by 62
My kind of people: Political polarization, ideology, and firm location
Barber, B., & Blake, D. (2023) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.3572 · Cited by 45
Denham, B. E. (2019) · International Journal of Drug Policy · doi:10.1016/j.drugpo.2019.06.007 · Cited by 49
A typology of empathy and its many moral forms
Read, H. (2019) · Philosophy Compass · doi:10.1111/phc3.12623 · Cited by 44
Brown, L. W., Manegold, J. G., & Marquardt, D. J. (2020) · Business and Society Review · doi:10.1111/basr.12196 · Cited by 48
Putting the affect into affective polarisation
Bakker, B. N., & Yphtach Lelkes, B. (2024) · Cognition & Emotion · doi:10.1080/02699931.2024.2362366 · Cited by 62
Trust across political conflicts: Evidence from a survey experiment in divided societies
Martini, S., & Torcal, M. (2016) · Party Politics · doi:10.1177/1354068816685933 · Cited by 49
The Social Context of Media Trust: A Network Influence Model
Ognyanova, K. (2019) · Journal of Communications · doi:10.1093/joc/jqz031 · Cited by 39
Denial and distrust: explaining the partisan climate gap
Bugden, D. (2022) · Climatic Change · doi:10.1007/s10584-022-03321-2 · Cited by 46
Myrick, R. (2022) · International Politics · doi:10.1057/s41311-022-00382-z · Cited by 43
From democracy to hybrid regime. Democratic backsliding and populism in Hungary and Tunisia
Huber, D. V., & Pisciotta, B. (2022) · Contemporary Politics · doi:10.1080/13569775.2022.2162210 · Cited by 42
DesJardine, M. R., Shi, W., & Westphal, J. D. (2023) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/01492063221151161 · Cited by 42
Political participation on Facebook during Brexit
Bossetta, M., Segesten, A. D., & Trenz, H. (2017) · Journal of Language and Politics · doi:10.1075/jlp.17009.dut · Cited by 42
Brogaard, B. “. (2020) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190084448.001.0001 · Cited by 53
Brands in the eye of the storm: navigating political consumerism and boycott calls on social media
Dalakas, V., Melancon, J. P., & Szczytynski, I. (2022) · Qualitative Market Research An International Journal · doi:10.1108/qmr-07-2021-0089 · Cited by 41
Affective Polarization in the Canadian Party System, 1988–2021
Johnston, R. (2023) · Canadian Journal of Political Science · doi:10.1017/s0008423923000112 · Cited by 47
Grossmann, I., & brienza, J. P. (2018) · Journal of Intelligence · doi:10.3390/jintelligence6020022 · Cited by 42
We Don't Speak the Same Language: Interpreting Polarization through Machine Translation
KhudaBukhsh, A. R., Sarkar, R., Kamlet, M. S., & Mitchell, T. M. (2021) · Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1609/aaai.v35i17.17748 · Cited by 42
Political Discussion is Abundant in Non-political Subreddits (and Less Toxic)
Rajadesingan, A., Budak, C., & Resnick, P. (2021) · Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media · doi:10.1609/icwsm.v15i1.18081 · Cited by 41
The Realignment of Political Tolerance in the United States
Chong, D., Citrin, J., & Levy, M. E. (2022) · Perspectives on Politics · doi:10.1017/s1537592722002079 · Cited by 41
Health Implications, Leaders Societies, and Climate Change: A Global Review
Abbas, A., Ekowati, D., Suhariadi, F., & Fenitra, R. M. (2022) · Springer climate · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-15501-7_26 · Cited by 49
Conover, P. J., & Miller, P. (2017) · Social Science Quarterly · doi:10.1111/ssqu.12410 · Cited by 39
Bartels, B. L., & Johnston, C. D. (2020) · Cited by 41
The cost of a divided America: an experimental study into destructive behavior
Mill, W., & Morgan, J. (2021) · Experimental Economics · doi:10.1007/s10683-021-09737-4 · Cited by 40
Hooghe, M., & Oser, J. L. (2017) · Social Science Research · doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2017.08.005 · Cited by 42
Vraga, E. K., Myers, T. A., Kotcher, J., Beall, L., & Maibach, E. W. (2018) · Royal Society Open Science · doi:10.1098/rsos.170505 · Cited by 42
Bliuc, A., Smith, L. G. E., & Moynihan, T. (2020) · Group Processes & Intergroup Relations · doi:10.1177/1368430220942567 · Cited by 40
Partisan in-group bias before and after elections
Sheffer, L. (2020) · Electoral Studies · doi:10.1016/j.electstud.2020.102191 · Cited by 42
The Purpose of Senatorial Grandstanding during Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings
Schoenherr, J. A., Lane, E. A., & Armaly, M. (2020) · Journal of Law and Courts · doi:10.1086/709913 · Cited by 39
Jones-Jang, S. M., & Noland, C. R. (2020) · Health Communication · doi:10.1080/10410236.2020.1859723 · Cited by 39
Identity, Diversity, and Team Performance: Evidence from U.S. Mutual Funds
Evans, R. B., Prado, M. P., Rizzo, A. E., & Zambrana, R. (2019) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.2022.00544 · Cited by 50
Are Voters Mobilized by a ‘Friend-and-Neighbor’ on the Ballot? Evidence from a Field Experiment
Panagopoulos, C., Leighley, J. E., & Hamel, B. T. (2017) · Political Behavior · doi:10.1007/s11109-016-9383-3 · Cited by 39
The New Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere
Stewart, E. M., & Hartmann, D. (2020) · Sociological Theory · doi:10.1177/0735275120926205 · Cited by 43
Strange Bedfellows: The Alliance Theory of Political Belief Systems
Pinsof, D., Sears, D. O., & Haselton, M. G. (2023) · Psychological Inquiry · doi:10.1080/1047840x.2023.2274433 · Cited by 49
van Erkel, P. F. A., & Turkenburg, E. (2022) · European Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s1755773922000121 · Cited by 46
The Balanced Ideological Antipathy Model
Crawford, J. T., Mallinas, S. R., & Furman, B. J. (2015) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167215603713 · Cited by 39
Unity in diversity? Polarization, issue diversity and satisfaction with democracy
Hoerner, J., & HOBOLT, S. B. (2019) · Journal of European Public Policy · doi:10.1080/13501763.2019.1699592 · Cited by 40
Moral grandstanding and political polarization: A multi-study consideration
Grubbs, J. B., Warmke, B., Tosi, J., & James, A. S. (2020) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2020.104009 · Cited by 41
Partisan‐Motivated Evaluations of Sexual Misconduct and the Mitigating Role of the #MeToo Movement
Klar, S., & McCoy, A. (2021) · American Journal of Political Science · doi:10.1111/ajps.12619 · Cited by 38
Tenove, C., Buffie, J., McKay, S., & Moscrop, D. (2018) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3235819 · Cited by 50
Clinton, J., Cohen, J. S., Lapinski, J., & Trussler, M. (2020) · Social Science Research Network · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3633934 · Cited by 56
Deepening the rift: Negative campaigning fosters affective polarization in multiparty elections
Martin, D., & Nai, A. (2024) · Electoral Studies · doi:10.1016/j.electstud.2024.102745 · Cited by 45
Hoewe, J., & Ahern, L. A. (2017) · Environmental Communication · doi:10.1080/17524032.2017.1371050 · Cited by 42
Catching My Anger: How Political Elites Create Angrier Citizens
Stapleton, C. E., & Dawkins, R. (2021) · Political Research Quarterly · doi:10.1177/10659129211026972 · Cited by 43
Polarized platforms? How partisanship shapes perceptions of “algorithmic news bias”
Calice, M. N., Bao, L., Freiling, I., Howell, E. L., Xenos, M. A., Yang, S., Brossard, D., Newman, T. P., & Scheufele, D. A. (2021) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/14614448211034159 · Cited by 41
Secular Surge: A New Fault Line in American Politics
Campbell, D. E., Layman, G. C., & Green, J. C. (2020) · Cited by 36
Petkevič, V., & Nai, A. (2021) · American Politics Research · doi:10.1177/1532673x211055676 · Cited by 40
Fit for the Job: Candidate Qualifications and Vote Choice in Low Information Elections
Atkeson, L. R., & Hamel, B. T. (2018) · Political Behavior · doi:10.1007/s11109-018-9486-0 · Cited by 36
Information and Issue Constraints on Party Cues
Chong, D., & Mullinix, K. J. (2018) · American Politics Research · doi:10.1177/1532673x18803887 · Cited by 36
Suk, J., Coppini, D., Múñiz, C., & Rojas, H. (2021) · Communication and the Public · doi:10.1177/20570473211063237 · Cited by 42
Deciding to be authentic: Intuition is favored over deliberation when authenticity matters
Oktar, K., & Lombrozo, T. (2022) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2022.105021 · Cited by 40
Talisse, R. B. (2019) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190924195.001.0001 · Cited by 250
Lay Belief in Biopolitics and Political Prejudice
Suhay, E., Brandt, M. J., & Proulx, T. (2016) · Social Psychological and Personality Science · doi:10.1177/1948550616667615 · Cited by 37
Partisan Conformity, Social Identity, and the Formation of Policy Preferences
Toff, B., & Suhay, E. (2018) · International Journal of Public Opinion Research · doi:10.1093/ijpor/edy014 · Cited by 39
The Intergroup Foundations of Policy Influence
Hinkle, R. K., & Nelson, M. J. (2018) · Political Research Quarterly · doi:10.1177/1065912918761008 · Cited by 35
Nai, A., & Maier, J. (2023) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197681756.001.0001 · Cited by 39
How Do Indifferent Voters Decide? The Political Importance of Implicit Attitudes
Ryan, T. J. (2017) · American Journal of Political Science · doi:10.1111/ajps.12307 · Cited by 35
Metadata
- Authors
- Iyengar, S., & Westwood, S. J.
- Affiliations
- Stanford University (US)
- Princeton University (US)
- Venue
- American Journal of Political Science
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2014-12-16
- Volume
- 59
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 690-707
- ISSN
- 0092-5853 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-5907
- OpenAlex
- W2137998590
- Cited by
- 2,452
- References
- 76
- Citations by year
- 2026: 241 · 2025: 226 · 2024: 249 · 2023: 313 · 2022: 248 · 2021: 273 · 2020: 330 · 2019: 232 · 2018: 165 · 2017: 96 · 2016: 55 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 2
- FWCI
- 374.27
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- American Journal of Political Science (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Names, Identity, and Discrimination Research
- Keywords
- affective polarization, party identification, partisan hostility, social identity, racial discrimination, implicit attitudes, American voters
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
