NEW PAPER: "A New Measure of Affective Polarization," by Nicolas Campos and myself. Using data from four large samples, we develop and validate a multidimensional scale measure of affective polarization. (1/n)
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
Our starting point was Finkel et al.'s (2020) theoretical work on 'political sectarianism,' which analogizes partisan polarization to religious sectarianism, characterizing it in terms of othering, aversion, and moralization. (2/n)
We retain the othering / aversion / moralization framework, though we ultimately conceptualize + measure the aversion and moralization dimensions somewhat differently. (3/n)
Specifically, we conceptualize aversion not simply in terms of partisan dislike, but also in terms of the psychology of avoidance. For moralization, we focus less on perceptions of the out-party as evil and more on the perception that in-partisan identity is rooted in basic moral values. (4/n)
This scale has a consistent correlated three-factor structure; the dimensions are correlated (typically r = 0.50 to r = 0.60), but not overwhelmingly so. Moralization, in particular, is only modestly correlated with aversion (rs ~ 0.20). Thus, the dimensions are related but not redundant. (6/n)
Importantly, we also demonstrate that the scale shows measurement invariance across partisan identities, making it useful for cross-partisan comparisons. (7/n)
Moral as in a normative. I couldn't be bad because I shouldn't be bad if my morality and identity are consistent, inherently in a supposed positive assumption of priors.
Important not to imply that it’s bad always. One big failure of affective polarization study is that it’s very both-sides-y, which is empirically & morally bankrupt. It misdirects attention from the real problems & their origins. Not sure if you get at that in the paper but could be a good revision!
I'm only part of the way through the paper, but looks like they find some evidence of symmetry across party ID, but that polarization is a stronger predictor of support for violence among Rs.
The important part is not equal percentages, it’s recognizing that Dems and Reps get to the same responses via very different routes that aren’t normative equivalent. Dems even normatively positive in many ways.
Comments