The Partisan Sort: How Liberals Became Democrats and Conservatives Became Republicans
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?
The American electorate has come to be organized in two increasingly homogeneous parties, with a variety of social, cultural, economic, geographic, and ideological cleavages falling in line with the partisan divide.
“The American electorate has thus come to be organized in two increasingly homogeneous parties, with a variety of social, cultural, economic, geographic, and ideological cleavages falling in line with the partisan divide (19, 50, 51).”
From How digital media drive affective polarization through partisan sorting (2022) · cites this paper as [19]
The causal link between digital media and polarization runs not through divergence of opinions but via the dynamics of partisan sorting.
“According to these scholars, sorting is thus central to understanding the rise in polarization and the growing sense of difference, distrust, and disdain between opposing partisans, suggesting that the causal link between digital media and polarization runs not through divergence of opinions but rather via the dynamics of partisan sorting (19).”
From How digital media drive affective polarization through partisan sorting (2022) · cites this paper as [19]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
Cited by 1,698
- Authors
- Levendusky, M.
- Corresponding author
- Levendusky, Matthew
- ORCID
- Levendusky, Matthew
- Venue
- University of Chicago Press eBooks
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 2009
- OpenAlex
- W4234814990
- Cited by
- 1,698
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 104 · 2025: 127 · 2024: 117 · 2023: 173 · 2022: 133 · 2021: 150 · 2020: 200 · 2019: 122 · 2018: 112 · 2017: 76 · 2016: 99 · 2015: 76 · 2014: 71 · 2013: 42 · 2012: 50
- FWCI
- 47.60
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- University of Chicago Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Game Theory and Voting Systems
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Theory and Democracy
- Keywords
- partisanship, political parties
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
