Dynamics of Political Polarization

This article accounts for two puzzling paradoxes. The first paradox is the simultaneous absence and presence of attitude polarization-the fact that global attitude polarization is relatively rare, even though pundits describe it as common. The second paradox is the simultaneous presence and absence...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:American sociological review 2007-10, Vol.72 (5), p.784-811
Hauptverfasser: Baldassarri, Delia, Bearman, Peter
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 811
container_issue 5
container_start_page 784
container_title American sociological review
container_volume 72
creator Baldassarri, Delia
Bearman, Peter
description This article accounts for two puzzling paradoxes. The first paradox is the simultaneous absence and presence of attitude polarization-the fact that global attitude polarization is relatively rare, even though pundits describe it as common. The second paradox is the simultaneous presence and absence of social polarization-the fact that while individuals experience attitude homogeneity in their interpersonal networks, their networks are characterized by attitude heterogeneity. These paradoxes give rise to numerous scholarly arguments. By developing a formal model of interpersonal influence over attitudes in a context where individuals hold simultaneous positions on multiple issues, we show why these arguments are not mutually exclusive and how they meaningfully refer to the same social setting. The results from this model provide a single parsimonious account for both paradoxes. The framework we develop may be generalized to a wider array of problems, including classic problems in collective action.
doi_str_mv 10.1177/000312240707200507
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_61684997</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>25472492</jstor_id><sage_id>10.1177_000312240707200507</sage_id><sourcerecordid>25472492</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c492t-8854507bdfcb38172cea8cb594155f63c41b0b11a764a76bf4845e56caee0573</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkUtLAzEUhYMoWKt_QBBKRXdj834spT6hoIvuh0zMSMp0UpPpov56E6aoKNpFSALfPefeewA4RfAKISEmEEKCMKZQQIEhZFDsgQFSRBUSC7QPBhkoMnEIjmJcpC9kSg3A-GbT6qUzceTr0bNvXOeMbvJLB_euO-fbY3BQ6ybak-09BPO72_n0oZg93T9Or2eFoQp3hZSMJt_qpTYVkUhgY7U0FVMUMVZzYiiqYIWQFpymU9VUUmYZN9payAQZgstedhX829rGrly6aGzT6Nb6dSw54pIqtRtkSqTBMd0NirQPztVOkHAhad7gEIx_gAu_Dm3aSomRlFhCmaHzv6DEpM4kI9kT95QJPsZg63IV3FKHTYlgmTMtf2eaii620jqmmOqgW-PiV6VCQvaTT3ou6lf7zf4_5bO-YhE7Hz4VMaMCp3jJB_Bjsvs</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1883928539</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Dynamics of Political Polarization</title><source>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>SAGE Complete A-Z List</source><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><creator>Baldassarri, Delia ; Bearman, Peter</creator><creatorcontrib>Baldassarri, Delia ; Bearman, Peter</creatorcontrib><description>This article accounts for two puzzling paradoxes. The first paradox is the simultaneous absence and presence of attitude polarization-the fact that global attitude polarization is relatively rare, even though pundits describe it as common. The second paradox is the simultaneous presence and absence of social polarization-the fact that while individuals experience attitude homogeneity in their interpersonal networks, their networks are characterized by attitude heterogeneity. These paradoxes give rise to numerous scholarly arguments. By developing a formal model of interpersonal influence over attitudes in a context where individuals hold simultaneous positions on multiple issues, we show why these arguments are not mutually exclusive and how they meaningfully refer to the same social setting. The results from this model provide a single parsimonious account for both paradoxes. The framework we develop may be generalized to a wider array of problems, including classic problems in collective action.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-1224</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1939-8271</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/000312240707200507</identifier><identifier>CODEN: ASREAL</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: American Sociological Association</publisher><subject>Abortion ; Attitudes ; Beliefs ; Collective Action ; Computer simulation ; Evidence ; Foreign policy ; Group Dynamics ; Heterogeneity ; Highway construction ; Homogeneity ; Ideology ; Interpersonal interaction ; Interpersonal networks ; Interpersonal Relationship ; Interpersonal relationships. Groups. Leadership ; Iraq War-2003 ; Networks ; Polarization ; Political activism ; Political Attitudes ; Political Influences ; Political Issues ; Political parties ; Political polarization ; Political sociology ; Political systems ; Politics ; Psychological attitudes ; Public Opinion ; Respect ; Saliency ; Segregation ; Social Class ; Social environment ; Social Influence ; Social Influences ; Social interaction ; Social Networks ; Social polarization ; Social psychology ; Social relations ; Social structures ; Socioeconomic Background ; Sociology ; Takeoff ; U.S.A</subject><ispartof>American sociological review, 2007-10, Vol.72 (5), p.784-811</ispartof><rights>Copyright 2007 American Sociological Association</rights><rights>2007 American Sociological Association</rights><rights>2008 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright American Sociological Association Oct 2007</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c492t-8854507bdfcb38172cea8cb594155f63c41b0b11a764a76bf4845e56caee0573</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c492t-8854507bdfcb38172cea8cb594155f63c41b0b11a764a76bf4845e56caee0573</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/25472492$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/25472492$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,12824,21798,27321,27901,27902,30977,33751,33752,43597,43598,57992,58225</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=19178924$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Baldassarri, Delia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bearman, Peter</creatorcontrib><title>Dynamics of Political Polarization</title><title>American sociological review</title><addtitle>Am Sociol Rev</addtitle><description>This article accounts for two puzzling paradoxes. The first paradox is the simultaneous absence and presence of attitude polarization-the fact that global attitude polarization is relatively rare, even though pundits describe it as common. The second paradox is the simultaneous presence and absence of social polarization-the fact that while individuals experience attitude homogeneity in their interpersonal networks, their networks are characterized by attitude heterogeneity. These paradoxes give rise to numerous scholarly arguments. By developing a formal model of interpersonal influence over attitudes in a context where individuals hold simultaneous positions on multiple issues, we show why these arguments are not mutually exclusive and how they meaningfully refer to the same social setting. The results from this model provide a single parsimonious account for both paradoxes. The framework we develop may be generalized to a wider array of problems, including classic problems in collective action.</description><subject>Abortion</subject><subject>Attitudes</subject><subject>Beliefs</subject><subject>Collective Action</subject><subject>Computer simulation</subject><subject>Evidence</subject><subject>Foreign policy</subject><subject>Group Dynamics</subject><subject>Heterogeneity</subject><subject>Highway construction</subject><subject>Homogeneity</subject><subject>Ideology</subject><subject>Interpersonal interaction</subject><subject>Interpersonal networks</subject><subject>Interpersonal Relationship</subject><subject>Interpersonal relationships. Groups. Leadership</subject><subject>Iraq War-2003</subject><subject>Networks</subject><subject>Polarization</subject><subject>Political activism</subject><subject>Political Attitudes</subject><subject>Political Influences</subject><subject>Political Issues</subject><subject>Political parties</subject><subject>Political polarization</subject><subject>Political sociology</subject><subject>Political systems</subject><subject>Politics</subject><subject>Psychological attitudes</subject><subject>Public Opinion</subject><subject>Respect</subject><subject>Saliency</subject><subject>Segregation</subject><subject>Social Class</subject><subject>Social environment</subject><subject>Social Influence</subject><subject>Social Influences</subject><subject>Social interaction</subject><subject>Social Networks</subject><subject>Social polarization</subject><subject>Social psychology</subject><subject>Social relations</subject><subject>Social structures</subject><subject>Socioeconomic Background</subject><subject>Sociology</subject><subject>Takeoff</subject><subject>U.S.A</subject><issn>0003-1224</issn><issn>1939-8271</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2007</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkUtLAzEUhYMoWKt_QBBKRXdj834spT6hoIvuh0zMSMp0UpPpov56E6aoKNpFSALfPefeewA4RfAKISEmEEKCMKZQQIEhZFDsgQFSRBUSC7QPBhkoMnEIjmJcpC9kSg3A-GbT6qUzceTr0bNvXOeMbvJLB_euO-fbY3BQ6ybak-09BPO72_n0oZg93T9Or2eFoQp3hZSMJt_qpTYVkUhgY7U0FVMUMVZzYiiqYIWQFpymU9VUUmYZN9payAQZgstedhX829rGrly6aGzT6Nb6dSw54pIqtRtkSqTBMd0NirQPztVOkHAhad7gEIx_gAu_Dm3aSomRlFhCmaHzv6DEpM4kI9kT95QJPsZg63IV3FKHTYlgmTMtf2eaii620jqmmOqgW-PiV6VCQvaTT3ou6lf7zf4_5bO-YhE7Hz4VMaMCp3jJB_Bjsvs</recordid><startdate>20071001</startdate><enddate>20071001</enddate><creator>Baldassarri, Delia</creator><creator>Bearman, Peter</creator><general>American Sociological Association</general><general>SAGE Publications</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AIMQZ</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>DPSOV</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>HEHIP</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KC-</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>LIQON</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M0T</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2L</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>M2S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>WZK</scope><scope>7QJ</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20071001</creationdate><title>Dynamics of Political Polarization</title><author>Baldassarri, Delia ; Bearman, Peter</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c492t-8854507bdfcb38172cea8cb594155f63c41b0b11a764a76bf4845e56caee0573</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2007</creationdate><topic>Abortion</topic><topic>Attitudes</topic><topic>Beliefs</topic><topic>Collective Action</topic><topic>Computer simulation</topic><topic>Evidence</topic><topic>Foreign policy</topic><topic>Group Dynamics</topic><topic>Heterogeneity</topic><topic>Highway construction</topic><topic>Homogeneity</topic><topic>Ideology</topic><topic>Interpersonal interaction</topic><topic>Interpersonal networks</topic><topic>Interpersonal Relationship</topic><topic>Interpersonal relationships. Groups. Leadership</topic><topic>Iraq War-2003</topic><topic>Networks</topic><topic>Polarization</topic><topic>Political activism</topic><topic>Political Attitudes</topic><topic>Political Influences</topic><topic>Political Issues</topic><topic>Political parties</topic><topic>Political polarization</topic><topic>Political sociology</topic><topic>Political systems</topic><topic>Politics</topic><topic>Psychological attitudes</topic><topic>Public Opinion</topic><topic>Respect</topic><topic>Saliency</topic><topic>Segregation</topic><topic>Social Class</topic><topic>Social environment</topic><topic>Social Influence</topic><topic>Social Influences</topic><topic>Social interaction</topic><topic>Social Networks</topic><topic>Social polarization</topic><topic>Social psychology</topic><topic>Social relations</topic><topic>Social structures</topic><topic>Socioeconomic Background</topic><topic>Sociology</topic><topic>Takeoff</topic><topic>U.S.A</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Baldassarri, Delia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bearman, Peter</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest One Literature</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection</collection><collection>Politics Collection</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Sociology Collection</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Politics Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ProQuest One Literature - U.S. Customers Only</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Education Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Political Science Database</collection><collection>Psychology Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Sociology Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><jtitle>American sociological review</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Baldassarri, Delia</au><au>Bearman, Peter</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Dynamics of Political Polarization</atitle><jtitle>American sociological review</jtitle><addtitle>Am Sociol Rev</addtitle><date>2007-10-01</date><risdate>2007</risdate><volume>72</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>784</spage><epage>811</epage><pages>784-811</pages><issn>0003-1224</issn><eissn>1939-8271</eissn><coden>ASREAL</coden><abstract>This article accounts for two puzzling paradoxes. The first paradox is the simultaneous absence and presence of attitude polarization-the fact that global attitude polarization is relatively rare, even though pundits describe it as common. The second paradox is the simultaneous presence and absence of social polarization-the fact that while individuals experience attitude homogeneity in their interpersonal networks, their networks are characterized by attitude heterogeneity. These paradoxes give rise to numerous scholarly arguments. By developing a formal model of interpersonal influence over attitudes in a context where individuals hold simultaneous positions on multiple issues, we show why these arguments are not mutually exclusive and how they meaningfully refer to the same social setting. The results from this model provide a single parsimonious account for both paradoxes. The framework we develop may be generalized to a wider array of problems, including classic problems in collective action.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>American Sociological Association</pub><doi>10.1177/000312240707200507</doi><tpages>28</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0003-1224
ispartof American sociological review, 2007-10, Vol.72 (5), p.784-811
issn 0003-1224
1939-8271
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_61684997
source Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); SAGE Complete A-Z List; Jstor Complete Legacy; Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; Sociological Abstracts
subjects Abortion
Attitudes
Beliefs
Collective Action
Computer simulation
Evidence
Foreign policy
Group Dynamics
Heterogeneity
Highway construction
Homogeneity
Ideology
Interpersonal interaction
Interpersonal networks
Interpersonal Relationship
Interpersonal relationships. Groups. Leadership
Iraq War-2003
Networks
Polarization
Political activism
Political Attitudes
Political Influences
Political Issues
Political parties
Political polarization
Political sociology
Political systems
Politics
Psychological attitudes
Public Opinion
Respect
Saliency
Segregation
Social Class
Social environment
Social Influence
Social Influences
Social interaction
Social Networks
Social polarization
Social psychology
Social relations
Social structures
Socioeconomic Background
Sociology
Takeoff
U.S.A
title Dynamics of Political Polarization
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-12T15%3A47%3A37IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Dynamics%20of%20Political%20Polarization&rft.jtitle=American%20sociological%20review&rft.au=Baldassarri,%20Delia&rft.date=2007-10-01&rft.volume=72&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=784&rft.epage=811&rft.pages=784-811&rft.issn=0003-1224&rft.eissn=1939-8271&rft.coden=ASREAL&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/000312240707200507&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E25472492%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1883928539&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=25472492&rft_sage_id=10.1177_000312240707200507&rfr_iscdi=true