The Electoral Consequences of Affective Polarization? Negative Voting in the 2020 US Presidential Election

About one third of American voters cast a vote more “against” than “for” a candidate in the 2020 Presidential election. This pattern, designated by negative voting, has been initially understood by rational choice scholarship as a product of cognitive dissonance and/or retrospective evaluations. Thi...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:American politics research 2022-05, Vol.50 (3), p.303-311
Main Authors: Garzia, Diego, Ferreira da Silva, Frederico
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Candidates
Cognitive dissonance
Group identity
Partisanship
Polarization
Presidential elections
Rational choice
Sectarianism
Voters
Voting
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:About one third of American voters cast a vote more “against” than “for” a candidate in the 2020 Presidential election. This pattern, designated by negative voting, has been initially understood by rational choice scholarship as a product of cognitive dissonance and/or retrospective evaluations. This article revisits this concept through the affective polarization framework in the light of the rise of political sectarianism in American society. Based on an original CAWI survey fielded after the 2020 election, our regression analysis demonstrates that the predicted probability of casting a negative vote significantly increases among individuals for whom out-candidate hate outweighs in-candidate love. Negative voting is less prevalent among partisans as their higher levels of in-group affection can offset out-group contempt. By asserting the enduring relevance of negative voting in American presidential elections, we aim at stimulating further research and discussion of its implications for democratic representation.
ISSN:1532-673X
1552-3373
DOI:10.1177/1532673X221074633