CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,881Electoral Systems and Political ParticipationMedia Influence and PoliticsPolitical Theory and Democracy

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 97 of the 97 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Political Polarization in the American Public

Fiorina, Morris P., Abrams, Samuel J.·2008·Annual Review of Political Science
DOI 10.1146/annurev.polisci.11.053106.153836
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

For more than two decades political scientists have discussed rising elite polarization in the United States, but the study of mass polarization did not receive comparable attention until fairly recently. This article surveys the literature on mass polarization. It begins with a discussion of the concept of polarization, then moves to a critical consideration of different kinds of evidence that have been used to study polarization, concluding that much of the evidence presents problems of inference that render conclusions problematic. The most direct evidence—citizens' positions on public policy issues—shows little or no indication of increased mass polarization over the past two to three decades. Party sorting—an increased correlation between policy views and partisan identification—clearly has occurred, although the extent has sometimes been exaggerated. Geographic polarization—the hypothesized tendency of like-minded people to cluster together—remains an open question. To date, there is no conclusive evidence that elite polarization has stimulated voters to polarize, on the one hand, or withdraw from politics, on the other.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1146/annurev.polisci.11.053106.153836

Cites

97 of 97 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 41

  1. Abramowitz AI. 2006. Disconnected, or joined at the hip? See Nivola & Brady 2006, pp. 72–85
  2. Aldrich JH, 2001, Congress Reconsidered, 269
  3. Berube A, 2004, San Francisco Chron, E1
  4. Binder SA. 2007. Consequences for the courts: polarized politics and the judicial brand. See Nivola & Brady 2007, pp. 107–33
  5. Bishop W, 2004, Austin Am. Statesman
  6. Bishop W, 2004, Forum, 2, 2
  7. Brady DW, Ferejohn JA, Harbridge L. 2007. Polarization and its consequences: an empirical assessment. See Nivola & Brady 2007, pp. 185–216
  8. Brady DW, Han HC. 2006. Polarization then and now: a historical perspective. See Nivola & Brady 2006, pp. 119–74
  9. Continetti M, 2007, Wkly. Standard, 12, 16
  10. Converse PE, 2006, Crit. Rev. Interdisc. J. Polit. Soc., 18, 297
  11. Davis NJ, 1997, Cultural Wars in American Politics, 39
  12. Eakman BK, 1999, Washington Times
  13. Edsall T, 2003, Atlantic Mon
  14. Ellis CR, 2005, Operational and symbolic ideology in the American electorate: the paradox of “conflicted conservatives.”
  15. Evans JH, 1997, Sociol. For., 12, 371
  16. Fiorina MP, 1999, Whatever happened to the median voter?
  17. Fiorina MP, Levendusky M. 2006a. Disconnected: the political class versus the people. See Nivola & Brady 2006, pp. 49–71
  18. Fiorina MP, Levendusky M. 2006b. Rejoinder. See Nivola & Brady 2006, pp. 95–117
  19. Galston WA, Nivola PS. 2007. Delineating the problem. See Nivola & Brady 2007, pp. 1–47
  20. Hacker JS, 2006, Forum, 3, 4
  21. Hacker J, 2006, Forum, 4, 1
  22. Hetherington MJ. 2007. Turned off or turned on: the effects of polarization on political participation, engagement, and representation. See Nivola & Brady 2007, pp. 1–33
  23. Klinkner PA, 2004, Forum, 2, 2
  24. Klinkner PA, 2004, Forum, 2, 2
  25. Klinkner PA, 2005, Forum, 3, 2
  26. Kull S, 2005, PIPA/Knowledge Networks Poll
  27. Levendusky M, 2006, Sorting: explaining change in the U.S. electorate
  28. Levendusky M, 2008, Choosing Sides: How Democrats Became Liberals and Republicans Became Conservatives
  29. 10.2307/3088067 · DOI
  30. Mattingly T, 2000, Knoxville News-Sentinel, B2
  31. Pinsky MI, 2006, Los Angeles Times
  32. Pitney JJ, 2006, Forum, 4, 3
  33. Pitney JJ, 2006, Forum, 4, 1
  34. Polsby NW, 1999, Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci., 2
  35. Rauch J, 2007, Natl. J.
  36. Schama S, 2004, Guardian Unlimited
  37. Shapiro RY, 2006, Political polarization and the rational public
  38. Shapiro RY, 2007, Power and Superpower: Leadership and Exceptionalism in the 21st Century, 49
  39. Stonecash JF, 2005, Forum, 3, 3
  40. The Pew Research Center For The People & The Press. 2007. Trends in political values and core attitudes: 1987–2007. Political landscape more favorable to Democrats. News Release. Mar. 22
  41. Wills G, 2004, NY Times

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 1,881

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Fiorina, M. P., & Abrams, S. J.
Affiliations
  • Stanford University (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
Venue
Annual Review of Political Science
Publisher
Annual Reviews
Published
2008-06-01
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
563-588
ISSN
  • 1094-2939 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-1577
DOI
10.1146/annurev.polisci.11.053106.153836
OpenAlex
W2137029365
Semantic Scholar
d77391948f4ae487ef3c22ad48cf579f6a7fcd61
Cited by
1,798
References
90
Citations by year
2026: 83 · 2025: 149 · 2024: 172 · 2023: 175 · 2022: 140 · 2021: 191 · 2020: 185 · 2019: 194 · 2018: 119 · 2017: 88 · 2016: 80 · 2015: 65 · 2014: 59 · 2013: 31 · 2012: 25
FWCI
31.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Annual Review of Political Science (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Media Influence and Politics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Theory and Democracy
Keywords
mass polarization, elite polarization, public opinion, party identification, policy positions, voter turnout, political attitudes

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