Search

The continual rise of affective polarization in the United States harms trust in democratic institutions. Scholars cite processes of ideological and social sorting of the partisan coalitions in the electorate as contributing to the rise of affective polarization, but how do these processes relate to one another? Most scholarship implicitly assumes period effects—that people change their feelings toward the parties uniformly and contemporaneously as they sort. However, it is also possible that sorting and affective polarization link with one another as a function of age or cohort effects. In this paper, I estimate age, period and cohort effects on affective polarization, partisan strength, and ideological sorting. I find that affective polarization increases over time, but also as people age. Age-related increases in affective polarization occur as a function of increases in partisan strength, and for Republicans, social sorting. Meanwhile, sorting only partially explains period effects. These effects combine such that each cohort enters the electorate more affectively polarized than the last. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Climate change is a divisive issue in the United States, and most research has focused on partisan differences, thereby leaving the impact of social identities on climate change attitudes underexplored. However, research has shown that the strength of varying and overlapping identities is key to understanding political attitudes. In this paper, we introduce Millennial Generation/Generation Z ("MillZ") as a meaningful social identity that influences political attitudes. Moreover, we contend that Latino*MillZ is an identity that has explanatory value for understanding climate change beliefs. While Latino and Millennial/Generation Z identities are not perfectly aligned, members of the Millennial Generation and Generation Z include a relatively high proportion of Latinos. Furthermore, since Latinos are disproportionately affected by climate change (i.e. the "climate gap") the MillZ identity should generate increased concern for the environment. We utilize an original national survey to explore the interplay of Latino and MillZ identities on attitudes about climate change. Results show that Latino and MillZ identities are both associated with heightened climate change concern and that strong attachment to one identity is sufficient to induce concern when the other is weak. These findings point to the importance of exploring multiple identities and offer evidence that social identities are activated in different ways to influence climate change attitudes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Urban–rural differences in partisan political loyalty are as familiar in the United States as they are in other countries. In this paper, we examine Gallup survey data from the early-2000s through 2018 to understand the urban–rural fissure that has been so noticeable in recent elections. We consider the potential mechanisms of an urban–rural political divide. We suggest that urban and rural dwellers oppose each other because they reside in far apart locations without much interaction and support different political parties because population size structures opinion quite differently in small towns compared with large cities. In particular, we consider the extent to which the compositional characteristics (i.e., race, income, education, etc.) of the individuals living in these locales drives the divide. We find that sizable urban–rural differences persist even after accounting for an array of individual-level characteristics that typically distinguish them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How do political identities shape seemingly non-political behaviors, such as consumption activity? This paper explores the extent to which political divisions impact apolitical behaviors, focusing on the case of voluntary donations to charitable organizations. Drawing on recent work showing partisans' differing use of 'conspicuous consumption,' we develop and test expectations as to how charitable activity may differ for Democrats and Republicans. Using three national surveys, including an original two-wave panel study, we find sizable differences in overall giving between partisans, with Republicans giving more to charity on average. We show that partisan differences in religiosity, and not differences in beliefs about government spending or desires to signal economic status, explain partisan gaps in giving. Our findings contribute to our understanding about the broader consequences of political fragmentation in the United States and provide further evidence for the social, as opposed to ideological, roots of political identity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]