Patterns of Affective Polarization toward Parties and Leaders across the Democratic World

Research indicates that affective polarization pervades contemporary democracies worldwide. Although some studies identify party leaders as polarizing agents, affective polarization has been predominantly conceptualized as a product of in-/out-party feelings. This study compares levels of party affe...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The American political science review 2024-05, Vol.118 (2), p.654-670
Main Authors: REILJAN, ANDRES, GARZIA, DIEGO, FERREIRA DA SILVA, FREDERICO, TRECHSEL, ALEXANDER H.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Candidates
Comparative analysis
Comparative literature
Comparative studies
Customization
Democracy
Elections
Electoral systems
Institution building
Leaders
Negative Attitudes
Negative campaigning
Partisanship
Polarization
Political leadership
Political parties
Politics
Segmentation
Social Distance
Social identity
Systems
Voters
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Research indicates that affective polarization pervades contemporary democracies worldwide. Although some studies identify party leaders as polarizing agents, affective polarization has been predominantly conceptualized as a product of in-/out-party feelings. This study compares levels of party affective polarization (PAP) and leader affective polarization (LAP) cross-nationally, using data from the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems. Applying like–dislike scales and an identical index to both concepts, we reveal that while the two strongly correlate, LAP is systematically lower than PAP. The United States emerges as an exceptional case, being the only country where LAP significantly exceeds PAP. Drawing on regime input/output and institutions as theoretical building blocks, we explore cross-national variations and show that the relative strength of LAP vis-à-vis PAP is increased by presidential regime type, poor government performance, and low party system fragmentation. The findings of this study contribute to the thriving research on affective polarization and personalization of politics.
ISSN:0003-0554
1537-5943
DOI:10.1017/S0003055423000485