Cited by 432Experimental Behavioral Economics StudiesElectoral Systems and Political ParticipationNames, Identity, and Discrimination Research

The Economic Consequences of Partisanship in a Polarized Era

McConnell, Christopher, Margalit, Yotam, Malhotra, Neil, Levendusky, Matthew·2018·American Journal of Political Science

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

Crossref · 10.1111/ajps.12330

Cites

6 of 6 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?

  • 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)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

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
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