Critically Assessing Measures and Correlates of Affective Polarization

• In Event: What Is Affective Polarization and How Should We Measure It?

Abstract

Over the past decade a considerable amount of research has been devoted to the rise in partisan antipathy. Despite the interest, there is no consensus about how best to measure affective polarization. Scholars have used differences in Democratic vs. Republican feeling thermometer scales, social distance measures, or in-group vs. out-group trait assignments but there is little agreement in the literature on whether these different measurements even relate to each other. If they do not relate to each other, they must measure different underlying constructs. This problem is especially acute in the United States, where the two-party system makes it difficult to distinguish measures of polarization from partisan identification. In this paper we conduct a critical assessment of established measures of affective polarization. We use both an original nationally representative sample of the American population as well as the ANES. We collect data on three frequently used measures of polarization and then evaluate their construct validity, assess how these measures relate to each other and how they relate to common correlates of polarization such as partisan strength, the strength of issue attitudes, and support for democracy. Partisanship is foundational to democratic politics, but some argue our partisanship has become so strong and driven by animus that it threatens the democratic project that bore it. Disentangling partisanship from affect will help us distinguish what dispositions are a threat to democracy versus those that are an essential part of it.

Authors

• Joshua N. Zingher, Old Dominion University

• Alexa Bankert, University of Georgia