How State Identities Shape Political Engagement in the United States

• In Event: Elections and Public Opinion in State Politics

Abstract

In recent years, scholars have begun to pay more attention to several aspects of state identities in the United States. This attention comes amid ongoing gridlock and polarization at the federal level, which has led to divergent policy trajectories at the state level on national hot-button issues such as immigration, gun control, abortion, voting rights, and more. Scholars have assessed the degree of psychological connection people have to their states, finding that strong state identities are common. Second, they have examined whether state identities are driven by political or apolitical factors, finding that politics is in fact a significant driver of state identities and that state identities are not just driven by factors like food, music, and nature. Third, research examines state identification as an independent variable, indicating that it enhances trust in government and evaluations of public officials. The present paper builds on this growing body of work on state identities by examining whether state identities shape political engagement. Several types of political engagement are considered, including attending meetings, donating to candidates or charitable causes, contacting elected officials, and discussing politics with friends and family. Engagement with national, state, and local government is examined. Finally, the analysis considers whether different measures of psychological connection to one’s state, such as state pride or saying that the state is important to one’s identity, perform similarly with respect to their relationship with political engagement. Results indicate that people with strong state identities are more likely than people with weak state identities to engage in a variety of acts, such as attending local meetings, volunteering, and donating, but state identities are unrelated to contacting elected officials. The paper ends with a discussion of the implications of the findings and suggestions for future research.

Author

• Deborah Schildkraut, Tufts University