Party, Race, and Neutrality: Investigating the Interdependence of Attitudes toward Social Groups

IF 7.1 1区 社会学 Q1 SOCIOLOGY American Sociological Review Pub Date : 2022-11-26 DOI:10.1177/00031224221135797
Jordan Brensinger, Ramina Sotoudeh
{"title":"Party, Race, and Neutrality: Investigating the Interdependence of Attitudes toward Social Groups","authors":"Jordan Brensinger, Ramina Sotoudeh","doi":"10.1177/00031224221135797","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recent public and scholarly discourse suggests that partisanship informs how people feel about social groups in the United States by organizing those groups into camps of political friends and enemies. More generally, this implies that Americans’ attitudes toward social groups exhibit interdependence, a heretofore underexplored proposition. We develop a conceptual and methodological approach to investigating such interdependence and apply it to attitudes toward 17 social groups, the broadest set of measures available to date. We identify three subpopulations with distinct attitude logics: partisans, who feel warm toward groups commonly associated with their political party and cool toward those linked to the out-party; racials, distinguished by their consistently warmer or cooler feelings toward all racial groups relative to other forms of social group membership; and neutrals, who generally evaluate social groups neither warmly nor coolly. Individuals’ social positions and experiences, particularly the strength of their partisanship, their race, and their experience of racial discrimination, inform how they construe the social space. These findings shed light on contemporary political and social divisions while expanding the toolkit available for the study of attitudes toward social groups.","PeriodicalId":48461,"journal":{"name":"American Sociological Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Sociological Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00031224221135797","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Recent public and scholarly discourse suggests that partisanship informs how people feel about social groups in the United States by organizing those groups into camps of political friends and enemies. More generally, this implies that Americans’ attitudes toward social groups exhibit interdependence, a heretofore underexplored proposition. We develop a conceptual and methodological approach to investigating such interdependence and apply it to attitudes toward 17 social groups, the broadest set of measures available to date. We identify three subpopulations with distinct attitude logics: partisans, who feel warm toward groups commonly associated with their political party and cool toward those linked to the out-party; racials, distinguished by their consistently warmer or cooler feelings toward all racial groups relative to other forms of social group membership; and neutrals, who generally evaluate social groups neither warmly nor coolly. Individuals’ social positions and experiences, particularly the strength of their partisanship, their race, and their experience of racial discrimination, inform how they construe the social space. These findings shed light on contemporary political and social divisions while expanding the toolkit available for the study of attitudes toward social groups.
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
政党、种族与中立:对社会群体态度的相互依赖性研究
最近的公开和学术讨论表明,党派之争通过将美国的社会团体组织成政治朋友和敌人的阵营,来影响人们对这些团体的感受。更普遍地说,这意味着美国人对社会群体的态度表现出相互依存性,这是一个迄今为止未被充分探索的命题。我们制定了一种概念和方法来调查这种相互依存关系,并将其应用于对17个社会群体的态度,这是迄今为止最广泛的一套衡量标准。我们确定了三个具有不同态度逻辑的亚群体:党派人士,他们对通常与政党有关的群体感到热情,对与外部政党有关的人感到冷静;种族主义者,其特点是相对于其他形式的社会群体成员,他们对所有种族群体的感情始终是温暖或凉爽的;以及中立派,他们通常对社会群体的评价既不热情也不冷静。个人的社会立场和经历,特别是他们的党派立场、种族和种族歧视经历,决定了他们如何构建社会空间。这些发现揭示了当代的政治和社会分歧,同时扩大了研究对社会群体态度的工具包。
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
13.30
自引率
3.30%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: The American Sociological Association (ASA) is a non-profit membership association established in 1905. Its mission is to advance sociology as a scientific discipline and profession that serves the public good. ASA is comprised of approximately 12,000 members including faculty members, researchers, practitioners, and students in the field of sociology. Roughly 20% of the members work in government, business, or non-profit organizations. One of ASA's primary endeavors is the publication and dissemination of important sociological research. To this end, they founded the American Sociological Review (ASR) in 1936. ASR is the flagship journal of the association and publishes original works that are of general interest and contribute to the advancement of sociology. The journal seeks to publish new theoretical developments, research results that enhance our understanding of fundamental social processes, and significant methodological innovations. ASR welcomes submissions from all areas of sociology, placing an emphasis on exceptional quality. Aside from ASR, ASA also publishes 14 professional journals and magazines. Additionally, they organize an annual meeting that attracts over 6,000 participants. ASA's membership consists of scholars, professionals, and students dedicated to the study and application of sociology in various domains of society.
期刊最新文献
The Culture of Censorship: State Intervention and Complicit Creativity in Global Film Production Learning to Think Like an Economist without Becoming One: Ambivalent Reproduction and Policy Couplings in a Masters of Public Affairs Program Safe as Houses: Financialization, Foreclosure, and Precarious Homeownership in the United States Cultural Tariffing: Appropriation and the Right to Cross Cultural Boundaries Threats to Blue Networks: The Effect of Partner Injuries on Police Misconduct
×
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