Consequences of affective polarization: Avoidance, intolerance and support for violence in the United Kingdom and Norway

IF 3.6 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE European Journal of Political Research Pub Date : 2023-08-23 DOI:10.1111/1475-6765.12623
LARS ERIK BERNTZEN, HAYLEE KELSALL, EELCO HARTEVELD
{"title":"Consequences of affective polarization: Avoidance, intolerance and support for violence in the United Kingdom and Norway","authors":"LARS ERIK BERNTZEN,&nbsp;HAYLEE KELSALL,&nbsp;EELCO HARTEVELD","doi":"10.1111/1475-6765.12623","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Affective polarization – that is, antipathy towards political opponents – sits high on the academic and political agenda. This is because it is thought to have a multitude of damaging consequences, both for how citizens view and approach each other and for how they relate to the political system. This study investigates some of the most mentioned and worrying potential consequences of affective polarization at the individual level. Zooming in on Europe, it sheds light on the substantive relationship between partisan antipathy and three kinds of norm-breaking escalation in the form of avoidance, intolerance and support for violence against party supporters. Methodologically, it unpacks the affective component of polarization, testing to what extent the traditional feeling thermometer performs as a predictor of these three potential outcomes. It then tests alternative expectations of the antecedents of such escalation derived from the intergroup emotions’ literature and the study of political radicalization. This is done using a broad range of both established and new survey items fielded in nationally representative panels between May and November 2020 in two contexts that score relatively low (Norway) and high (the United Kingdom) on affective polarization. They reveal that avoidance, intolerance and support for political violence can be validly measured, and are manifest, in these two European countries, but that they are only weakly correlated to mere dislike of the outgroup. Instead, more severe forms of norm-breaking escalation depend on the specific nature of the discrete emotions induced beyond dislike (anger, fear or disgust) and are rooted in factors such as relative deprivation, Manicheanism, and dark personality traits (psychopathy, Machiavellianism and narcissism). We discuss the implications for the way polarization is theorized and measured.</p>","PeriodicalId":48273,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Political Research","volume":"63 3","pages":"927-949"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1475-6765.12623","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Political Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1475-6765.12623","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Affective polarization – that is, antipathy towards political opponents – sits high on the academic and political agenda. This is because it is thought to have a multitude of damaging consequences, both for how citizens view and approach each other and for how they relate to the political system. This study investigates some of the most mentioned and worrying potential consequences of affective polarization at the individual level. Zooming in on Europe, it sheds light on the substantive relationship between partisan antipathy and three kinds of norm-breaking escalation in the form of avoidance, intolerance and support for violence against party supporters. Methodologically, it unpacks the affective component of polarization, testing to what extent the traditional feeling thermometer performs as a predictor of these three potential outcomes. It then tests alternative expectations of the antecedents of such escalation derived from the intergroup emotions’ literature and the study of political radicalization. This is done using a broad range of both established and new survey items fielded in nationally representative panels between May and November 2020 in two contexts that score relatively low (Norway) and high (the United Kingdom) on affective polarization. They reveal that avoidance, intolerance and support for political violence can be validly measured, and are manifest, in these two European countries, but that they are only weakly correlated to mere dislike of the outgroup. Instead, more severe forms of norm-breaking escalation depend on the specific nature of the discrete emotions induced beyond dislike (anger, fear or disgust) and are rooted in factors such as relative deprivation, Manicheanism, and dark personality traits (psychopathy, Machiavellianism and narcissism). We discuss the implications for the way polarization is theorized and measured.

Abstract Image

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
情感两极分化的后果:英国和挪威对暴力的回避、不容忍和支持
情感两极分化——也就是对政治对手的反感——在学术和政治议程上占据重要地位。这是因为它被认为会产生许多破坏性后果,包括公民如何看待和对待彼此,以及他们与政治制度的关系。这项研究在个人层面调查了情感两极分化的一些最被提及和最令人担忧的潜在后果。聚焦欧洲,它揭示了党派反感与三种破坏规范的升级之间的实质性关系,这三种升级形式是回避、不容忍和支持针对政党支持者的暴力。从方法上讲,它揭示了两极分化的情感成分,测试了传统的感觉温度计在多大程度上可以预测这三种潜在结果。然后,它测试了来自群体间情绪文学和政治激进化研究的对这种升级前因的替代预期。这是在2020年5月至11月期间,在情感两极分化得分相对较低(挪威)和较高(英国)的两种情况下,使用全国代表性小组中部署的一系列既有调查项目和新调查项目来完成的。它们表明,在这两个欧洲国家,对政治暴力的回避、不容忍和支持是可以有效衡量的,而且是显而易见的,但它们与仅仅对外部群体的厌恶只有微弱的相关性。相反,更严重的破坏规范升级形式取决于厌恶(愤怒、恐惧或厌恶)之外引发的离散情绪的具体性质,并植根于相对剥夺、摩尼教和黑暗人格特征(精神病、马基雅维利主义和自恋)等因素。我们讨论了极化理论化和测量方式的含义。
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
CiteScore
10.00
自引率
5.70%
发文量
67
期刊介绍: European Journal of Political Research specialises in articles articulating theoretical and comparative perspectives in political science, and welcomes both quantitative and qualitative approaches. EJPR also publishes short research notes outlining ongoing research in more specific areas of research. The Journal includes the Political Data Yearbook, published as a double issue at the end of each volume.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Issue Information Correction to (When) do electoral mandates set the agenda? Government capacity and mandate responsiveness in Germany Issue Information Patterns of democracy and democratic satisfaction: Results from a comparative conjoint experiment
×
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