Search

Affective polarization has recently become one of the phenomena of greatest interest to social researchers. The large number of papers on this concept requires a systematic review to organize its main explanatory theories. In the following, we analyse the distinctive dimensions of affective polarization, a political polarization with non-political effects, and the hypotheses that help us to understand its emergence, from the perspective of the masses, the elites and the media ecosystem. In particular, we are confronted with the possibility that ideological radicalization is at the origin of this affective polarization or that, on the contrary, without being so far apart in ideas, it is the constitution of political identities as social identities that causes a perceptual sense of false polarization that induces greater animosity between the supporters of the conflicting groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What factors impact on the productivity of legislators? In this paper, we argue that legislative productivity depends not only on party affiliation, seniority, gender, and other contextual considerations (e.g., alignment with the executive), as previous studies have shown, but also on the connections between legislators. Our main argument is that legislators' effectiveness in getting their proposals approved by the chamber depends on their centrality in the cosponsorship network. Unlike previous studies of Latin American legislatures, which usually consider bills as the unit of analysis, we focus on legislators and their individual records. We consider individual productivity as the number of authored bills approved by the chamber in a two-year congress. To test our hypothesis, we use data from the Argentine Chamber of Deputies from 1983 to 2019. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]