Do Partisans Always Like Their Inparty and Dislike Their Outparty? An Analysis of Partisans Across the Affective Spectrum

IF 1.6 3区 社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE American Politics Research Pub Date : 2022-11-14 DOI:10.1177/1532673X221139475
John K. Wagner, Adi Wiezel
{"title":"Do Partisans Always Like Their Inparty and Dislike Their Outparty? An Analysis of Partisans Across the Affective Spectrum","authors":"John K. Wagner, Adi Wiezel","doi":"10.1177/1532673X221139475","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"What can American partisan affect groups tell us about different models of partisan affect over a recent snapshot in time? Moreover, what implications do these groups have for political trust over that same snapshot in time? Results from the 2020 and 2016 American National Election Studies suggest that most partisans feel positively toward their inparty and negatively toward their outparty (Classically-Polarized)—consistent with classical approaches to affective polarization. However, some feel negatively toward their inparty and outparty (Double-Dislikers)—more consistent with negative partisanship models. Finally, some feel positively toward their inparty and outparty (Double-Likers). Despite recent work suggesting increasing outparty and inparty animosity, which implies growth in Double-Dislikers and the Classically-Polarized, only the Classically-Polarized grew between 2016 and 2020. Regarding political trust, compared to the Classically-Polarized, Double-Dislikers are associated with less political trust, whereas Double-Likers are associated with increasingly more political trust, suggesting substantive reasons for focusing on each group.","PeriodicalId":51482,"journal":{"name":"American Politics Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Politics Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X221139475","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

What can American partisan affect groups tell us about different models of partisan affect over a recent snapshot in time? Moreover, what implications do these groups have for political trust over that same snapshot in time? Results from the 2020 and 2016 American National Election Studies suggest that most partisans feel positively toward their inparty and negatively toward their outparty (Classically-Polarized)—consistent with classical approaches to affective polarization. However, some feel negatively toward their inparty and outparty (Double-Dislikers)—more consistent with negative partisanship models. Finally, some feel positively toward their inparty and outparty (Double-Likers). Despite recent work suggesting increasing outparty and inparty animosity, which implies growth in Double-Dislikers and the Classically-Polarized, only the Classically-Polarized grew between 2016 and 2020. Regarding political trust, compared to the Classically-Polarized, Double-Dislikers are associated with less political trust, whereas Double-Likers are associated with increasingly more political trust, suggesting substantive reasons for focusing on each group.
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
党派人士总是喜欢他们的党内人士而不喜欢他们的党外人士吗?跨情感谱的党派分析
在最近的一次快照中,美国党派影响团体能告诉我们什么关于党派影响的不同模型?此外,这些团体对同一时间的政治信任有什么影响?2020年和2016年美国全国选举研究的结果表明,大多数党派人士对自己的党内持积极态度,对自己的党外持消极态度(经典极化),这与情感极化的经典方法一致。然而,有些人对他们的党内和党外(双重不喜欢者)感到消极——这与消极的党派模式更为一致。最后,一些人对他们的党内和党外都有积极的感觉(双重喜欢者)。尽管最近的研究表明,党外和党内的敌意越来越大,这意味着双重厌恶者和经典两极分化者的数量在增加,但在2016年至2020年间,只有经典两极分化者有所增加。关于政治信任,与经典极化相比,双重不喜欢者与较少的政治信任相关,而双重喜欢者与越来越多的政治信任有关,这表明关注每个群体的实质性原因。
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
American Politics Research
American Politics Research POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
6.70%
发文量
66
期刊介绍: The purpose of Amercian Politics Research is to promote and disseminate high-quality research in all areas of American politics, including local, state, and national. American Politics Research will publish significant studies concerning American political behavior, political parties, public opinion, legislative behavior, courts and the legal process, executive and administrative politics, public policy, and all other topics appropriate to our understanding of American government and politics. Manuscripts from all social science disciplines are welcomed.
期刊最新文献
Partisan Differences in Voters’ Desire for Punishment in Response to Politicians’ Moral Transgressions Voting in the Mall: Ideology, Grievance, and Political Consumerism The Size and Structure of the Gender Gap in Economic Evaluations The Role of Self-Threat and Self-Affirmation in Initiation of Political Conversations Race or Place: Partisanship Among Black Rural Voters
×
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