Red vs blue hubris: Clarifying the relationship between partisanship and (anti)intellectualism

Edward Hohe
{"title":"Red vs blue hubris: Clarifying the relationship between partisanship and (anti)intellectualism","authors":"Edward Hohe","doi":"10.1177/13540688241229179","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recent research advancing our understanding of partisan cognitive differences finds symmetrical partisan routes to epistemic hubris: intellectual identity and anti-intellectual affect. These researchers conclude that epistemic hubris is largely due to intellectual identity among Democrats and anti-intellectual affect among Republicans. I investigate whether these relationships are purely due to a greater prevalence of intellectual identity among Democrats and anti-intellectual affect among Republicans or if these constructs are particularly potent in producing epistemic hubris among those who identify with their associated parties. I present observational evidence that partisanship conditions the influence of anti-intellectual affect on epistemic hubris but do not find that partisanship conditions the influence of intellectual identity. Based on these findings, we can expect Red America’s increasing anti-intellectualism to contribute to increasing epistemic hubris. More broadly, I provide empirical support for understanding intellectual identity and anti-intellectualism as distinct concepts based on their differing relationships with other fundamental political concepts.","PeriodicalId":506984,"journal":{"name":"Party Politics","volume":"6 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Party Politics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13540688241229179","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Recent research advancing our understanding of partisan cognitive differences finds symmetrical partisan routes to epistemic hubris: intellectual identity and anti-intellectual affect. These researchers conclude that epistemic hubris is largely due to intellectual identity among Democrats and anti-intellectual affect among Republicans. I investigate whether these relationships are purely due to a greater prevalence of intellectual identity among Democrats and anti-intellectual affect among Republicans or if these constructs are particularly potent in producing epistemic hubris among those who identify with their associated parties. I present observational evidence that partisanship conditions the influence of anti-intellectual affect on epistemic hubris but do not find that partisanship conditions the influence of intellectual identity. Based on these findings, we can expect Red America’s increasing anti-intellectualism to contribute to increasing epistemic hubris. More broadly, I provide empirical support for understanding intellectual identity and anti-intellectualism as distinct concepts based on their differing relationships with other fundamental political concepts.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
红色与蓝色的傲慢:厘清党派主义与(反)知识分子主义之间的关系
最近的研究推进了我们对党派认知差异的理解,发现了对称的党派认识傲慢途径:知识认同和反智情感。这些研究人员得出结论认为,认识论上的傲慢在很大程度上是由于民主党人的知识认同和共和党人的反智情绪造成的。我研究了这些关系是否纯粹是由于民主党人中更普遍的知识认同和共和党人中更普遍的反智情绪造成的,或者这些建构是否在那些认同其相关党派的人中特别容易产生认识论傲慢。我提出的观察证据表明,党派关系制约了反智情感对认识论傲慢的影响,但没有发现党派关系制约了知识认同的影响。基于这些发现,我们可以预期红色美国日益高涨的反智主义会助长认识论上的傲慢。从更广泛的意义上讲,我为将知识认同和反智主义理解为基于它们与其他基本政治概念的不同关系的不同概念提供了经验支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Book review: Financing the 2020 election Book Review: of Riley-Smith and of Wheatcroft Giorgia on their minds: Vote switching to Fratelli d’Italia in the Italian general election of 2022 Public support for the cordon sanitaire: Descriptive evidence from Spain Book review: Data-driven campaigning and political parties: Five advanced democracies compared
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1