Cited by 35Electoral Systems and Political ParticipationMedia Influence and PoliticsSocial Media and Politics

Affective Polarization Did Not Increase During the Coronavirus Pandemic

Open access
Boxell, Levi, Conway, Jacob, Druckman, James N., Gentzkow, Matthew·2021·SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract

We document trends in affective polarization during the COVID-19 pandemic. In our main measure, affective polarization is relatively flat between July 2019 and February 2020, then falls significantly around the onset of the pandemic. Three of five other data sources display a similar downward trend, with two of five data sources showing no significant change. A survey experiment shows that priming respondents to think about the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic significantly reduces affective polarization.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2139/ssrn.3785328

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Emphasizing a superordinate national identity can reduce out-group animus as well as affective and ideological polarization.

    “emphasizing a superordinate national identity can reduce out-group animus as well as affective and ideological polarization281–283, consistent with social identity theory90,92,139.”

    From Cognitive–motivational mechanisms of political polarization in social-communicative contexts (2022) · cites this paper as [283]

    Section 2.2 reports that a coronavirus prime improved feelings toward the opposing party and reduced affective polarization. The Discussion proposes a new sense of national unity as a possible mechanism, but the experiment did not isolate an emphasis on national identity, and the paper does not report a reduction in ideological polarization. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Boxell, L., Conway, J., Druckman, J. N., & Gentzkow, M.
Affiliations
  • Stanford University (US)
  • Northwestern University (US)
  • National Bureau of Economic Research (US)
Venue
SSRN Electronic Journal
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021
Volume
17
Issue
4
Pages
491-512
ISSN
  • 1554-0626 (ISSN-L)
  • 1556-5068
OpenAlex
W4287987789
Cited by
35
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 2
FWCI
16.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Quarterly Journal of Political Science (publishedVersion)
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (publishedVersion)
  • National Bureau of Economic Research (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (DGE-165651 8, 1656518)
  • Alfred P. Sloan Foundation
  • John S. and James L. Knight Foundation
  • Northwestern University
  • Institute for Humane Studies, George Mason University
  • Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research
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 › Communication › Social Media and Politics
Keywords
affective polarization, COVID-19 pandemic, political attitudes, partisan attitudes, survey experiment, priming, public opinion trends

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