Introduction
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
From Brazil to Poland, from Kenya to India, political divides are becoming increasingly hostile.
“From Brazil to Poland, from Kenya to India, political divides are becoming increasingly hostile (Carothers and O'Donohue 2019).”
From Them’ without ‘us’: Negative identities and affective polarization in Brazil (2022) · cites this paper as Carothers and O'Donohue 2019
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Backsliding: Democratic Regress in the Contemporary World
Haggard, S., & Kaufman, R. (2021) · doi:10.1017/9781108957809 · Cited by 464 · see citing works
How digital media drive affective polarization through partisan sorting
Törnberg, P. (2022) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2207159119 · Cited by 288 · see citing works
Them’ without ‘us’: Negative identities and affective polarization in Brazil
Areal, J. (2022) · Political Research Exchange · doi:10.1080/2474736x.2022.2117635 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
- Authors
- CAROTHERS, T., & O’DONOHUE, A.
- ORCID
- O’DONOHUE, ANDREW
- Venue
- Democracies Divided
- Publisher
- Brookings Institution Press
- Published
- 2019
- Pages
- 1-14
- OpenAlex
- W4416474063
- Cited by
- 2
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2023: 1
- Type
- other
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Brookings Institution Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
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
