The Economic Consequences of Partisanship in a Polarized Era
Abstract
With growing affective polarization in the United States, partisanship is increasingly an impediment to cooperation in political settings. But does partisanship also affect behavior in nonpolitical settings? We show evidence that it does, demonstrating its effect on economic outcomes across a range of experiments in real‐world environments. A field experiment in an online labor market indicates that workers request systematically lower reservation wages when the employer shares their political stance, reflecting a preference to work for co‐partisans. We conduct two field experiments with consumers and find a preference for dealing with co‐partisans, especially among those with strong partisan attachments. Finally, via a population‐based, incentivized survey experiment, we find that the influence of political considerations on economic choices extends also to weaker partisans. Whereas earlier studies show the political consequences of polarization in American politics, our findings suggest that partisanship spills over beyond the political, shaping cooperation in everyday economic behavior.
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?
Affective spillover of partisan and ideological attitudes has been documented in a variety of domains, including job applicant evaluations, dating behaviors, and online labor markets.
“Este fenómeno de derrame afectivo (affective spillover) de las actitudes partidarias e ideológicas ha sido documentado en una variedad de dominios, incluyendo evaluaciones de solicitantes de empleo (Gift y Gift 2015), conductas frente a citas (Huber y Malhotra, 2017), y mercados laborales en línea (McConnell et al., 2018).”
From El estudio de la polarización afectiva: una mirada metodológica (2022) · cites this paper as McConnell et al., 2018
Partisanship has bled into the nonpolitical sphere, driving ordinary citizens to reward copartisans and penalize opposing partisans.
“This work consistently shows that partisanship has bled into the nonpolitical sphere, driving ordinary citizens to reward copartisans and penalize opposing partisans, a point to which we return below.”
From The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States (2019) · cites this paper as McConnell et al. 2018
People exhibited a willingness to accept lower compensation (by 6.5%) from a partisan-congruent employer.
“People exhibited a willingness to accept lower compensation (by 6.5%) from a partisan-congruent employer.”
From The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States (2019) · cites this paper as McConnell et al. (2018)
McConnell et al. (2018) found no evidence of out-group animus; the purchasing rate remained stable across same-party and opposite-party sellers.
“The authors found no evidence of out-group animus; the purchasing rate remained stable across same-party and opposite-party sellers.”
From The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States (2019) · cites this paper as McConnell et al. (2018)
The effects of copartisan seller interaction were even larger among strong partisans.
“The effects were even larger among strong partisans.”
From The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States (2019) · cites this paper as McConnell et al. (2018)
People performed lower-quality work and exhibited less effort for a partisan-congruent employer.
“At the same time, they performed lower-quality work and exhibited less effort.”
From The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States (2019) · cites this paper as McConnell et al. (2018)
McConnell et al. (2018) mainly find evidence of in-group affinity as opposed to out-group prejudice.
“Unlike Gift & Gift (2015), they mainly find evidence of in-group affinity as opposed to out-group prejudice.”
From The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States (2019) · cites this paper as McConnell et al. (2018)
The only significant differences occurred between the copartisan condition and the control group.
“The only significant differences occurred between the copartisan condition and the control group.”
From The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States (2019) · cites this paper as McConnell et al. (2018)
Interacting with a copartisan seller nearly doubled the purchasing price of the gift card.
“However, interacting with a copartisan seller nearly doubled the purchasing price of the gift card.”
From The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States (2019) · cites this paper as McConnell et al. (2018)
There is evidence that ideological and partisan considerations inform the choice of friends, as well as business and romantic partners.
“there is evidence that ideological and partisan considerations inform the choice of friends, as well as business and romantic partners218–221.”
From Cognitive–motivational mechanisms of political polarization in social-communicative contexts (2022) · cites this paper as [220]
Cites
Evaluating Online Labor Markets for Experimental Research: Amazon.com's Mechanical Turk
Berinsky, A. J., Huber, G. A., & Lenz, G. S. (2012) · Political Analysis · doi:10.1093/pan/mpr057 · Cited by 4,008 · see citing works
Iyengar, S., Sood, G., & Lelkes, Y. (2012) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1093/poq/nfs038 · Cited by 2,748 · see citing works
Fear and loathing across party lines: New evidence on group polarization
Iyengar, S., & Westwood, S. J. (2015) · American Journal of Political Science · doi:10.1111/ajps.12152 · Cited by 2,452 · see citing works
(Mis)perceptions of Partisan Polarization in the American Public
Levendusky, M. S., & Malhotra, N. (2016) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1093/poq/nfv045 · Cited by 356 · see citing works
Self-citationThe Limits of Partisan Prejudice
Lelkes, Y., & Westwood, S. J. (2017) · The Journal of Politics · doi:10.1086/688223 · Cited by 311 · see citing works
No Compromise: Political Consequences of Moralized Attitudes
Ryan, T. J. (2017) · American Journal of Political Science · doi:10.1111/ajps.12248 · Cited by 273 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States
Iyengar, S., Lelkes, Y., Levendusky, M., Malhotra, N., & Westwood, S. J. (2019) · Annual Review of Political Science · doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-051117-073034 · Cited by 3,317 · see citing works
Self-citationGollwitzer, A., Martel, C., Brady, W. J., Pärnamets, P., Freedman, I. G., Knowles, E. D., & Van Bavel, J. J. (2020) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-020-00977-7 · Cited by 609 · see citing works
American Affective Polarization in Comparative Perspective
Gidron, N., Adams, J., & Horne, W. (2020) · doi:10.1017/9781108914123 · Cited by 481 · see citing works
Affective polarization, local contexts and public opinion in America
Druckman, J. N., Klar, S., Krupnikov, Y., Levendusky, M., & Ryan, J. B. (2020) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-020-01012-5 · Cited by 463 · see citing works
Self-citationCognitive–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
Megastudy testing 25 treatments to reduce antidemocratic attitudes and partisan animosity
Voelkel, J. G., Stagnaro, M., Chu, J., Pink, S. L., Mernyk, J. S., Redekopp, C., Ghezae, I., Cashman, M., Adjodah, D., Allen, L., et al. (2023) · doi:10.31219/osf.io/y79u5 · Cited by 174 · see citing works
Self-citationSantoro, E., & Broockman, D. E. (2022) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.abn5515 · Cited by 126 · see citing works
The Inseparability of Race and Partisanship in the United States
Westwood, S. J., & Peterson, E. (2022) · Political Behavior · doi:10.1007/s11109-020-09648-9 · Cited by 108 · see citing works
Intellectual humility in the sociopolitical domain
Krumrei-Mancuso, E. J., & Newman, B. (2020) · Self and Identity · doi:10.1080/15298868.2020.1714711 · Cited by 88 · see citing works
Moral polarization and out-party hostility in the US political context
Tappin, B. M., & McKay, R. T. (2019) · Journal of Social and Political Psychology · doi:10.5964/jspp.v7i1.1090 · Cited by 79 · see citing works
When Efforts to Depolarize the Electorate Fail
Levendusky, M. S. (2018) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1093/poq/nfy036 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
Self-citationAre there still limits on partisan prejudice?
Westwood, S. J., Peterson, E., & Lelkes, Y. (2019) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1093/poq/nfz034 · Cited by 61 · see citing works
Typecast: A Routine Mental Shortcut Causes Party Stereotyping
Ahler, D. J., & Sood, G. (2023) · Political Behavior · doi:10.1007/s11109-022-09780-8 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Druckman, J. N., & Shafranek, R. M. (2020) · The Journal of Politics · doi:10.1086/708776 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Differentiating the sources of post‐election partisan affect warming
Gidron, N., & Sheffer, L. (2024) · European Journal of Political Research · doi:10.1111/1475-6765.12641 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
El estudio de la polarización afectiva: una mirada metodológica
Freidin, E., Moro, R., & Silenzi, M. I. (2022) · REVISTA SAAP · doi:10.46468/rsaap.16.1.a2 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Measuring affective polarization: Matching concepts to measures
Druckman, J. N., Klar, S., Krupnikov, Y., Levendusky, M., & Ryan, J. B. (2026) · Political Psychology · doi:10.1111/pops.70152 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- McConnell, C., Margalit, Y., Malhotra, N., & Levendusky, M.
- Affiliations
- Stanford University (US)
- Tel Aviv University (IL)
- University of Pennsylvania (US)
- Venue
- American Journal of Political Science
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2017-08-31
- Volume
- 62
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 5-18
- ISSN
- 0092-5853 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-5907
- OpenAlex
- W2753242336
- Cited by
- 432
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 48 · 2025: 46 · 2024: 56 · 2023: 53 · 2022: 74 · 2021: 46 · 2020: 37 · 2019: 55 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 67.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Update notices
- erratum (2020-10-14)
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- American Journal of Political Science (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (1628057)
- Israel Science Foundation (3131433)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Names, Identity, and Discrimination Research
- Keywords
- partisanship, affective polarization, reservation wage, labor market, consumer behavior, political attitudes, cooperation
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