Article Version of Record

The dual nature of American partisan affect: Examining the impact of inparty affinity and outparty animosity on unique forms of political behavior

Author(s) / Creator(s)

Wiezel, Adi
Wagner, John K.

Abstract / Description

Much recent work has focused on Americans’ positive and negative feelings toward their own and opposing political parties. However, there is neither a consensus on how to model such partisan affect, nor a detailed understanding of its consequences for political participation. This work addressed these two gaps by first, empirically examining how many dimensions best characterize American partisan affect. Study 1A used contemporary, categorical approaches to factor analyses across an extensive set of partisan affect items from the Pew American Trends Panel to test two competing hypotheses: that (1A-1) partisan affect is one-dimensional, or that (1A-2) partisan affect is two-dimensional. Results suggested support for Hypothesis 1A-2; two dimensions of partisan affect covered inparty affinity and outparty animosity. Second, Study 1B investigated the predictive validity of different aspects of partisan affect in terms of discrete forms of political participation. Study 1B had three competing hypotheses implied by prior partisan affect literature: that (1B-1) outparty animosity (but not inparty affinity) would predict most forms of behavior, that (1B-2) outparty animosity would predict higher-cost forms of behavior, and inparty affinity would predict lower-cost forms of behavior, or that (1B-3) the combination/interaction of outparty animosity and inparty affinity would predict most forms of behavior. Results of logistic regressions suggested partial support for Hypothesis 1B-1 and direct support for Hypothesis 1B-2. Outparty animosity predicted more medium-cost forms of political participation, whereas inparty affinity predicted lower-cost forms of political participation. Implications are discussed for theory, the measurement of partisan affect, and the prediction of political participation.

Keyword(s)

political affect political polarization affective polarization political participation factor analysis

Persistent Identifier

Date of first publication

2023-06-16

Journal title

Journal of Social and Political Psychology

Volume

11

Issue

1

Page numbers

272–290

Publisher

PsychOpen GOLD

Publication status

publishedVersion

Review status

peerReviewed

Is version of

Citation

Wiezel, A. & Wagner, J. K. (2023). The dual nature of American partisan affect: Examining the impact of inparty affinity and outparty animosity on unique forms of political behavior. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 11(1), 272-290. https://doi.org/10.5964/jspp.8135
  • Author(s) / Creator(s)
    Wiezel, Adi
  • Author(s) / Creator(s)
    Wagner, John K.
  • PsychArchives acquisition timestamp
    2023-11-23T11:52:07Z
  • Made available on
    2023-11-23T11:52:07Z
  • Date of first publication
    2023-06-16
  • Abstract / Description
    Much recent work has focused on Americans’ positive and negative feelings toward their own and opposing political parties. However, there is neither a consensus on how to model such partisan affect, nor a detailed understanding of its consequences for political participation. This work addressed these two gaps by first, empirically examining how many dimensions best characterize American partisan affect. Study 1A used contemporary, categorical approaches to factor analyses across an extensive set of partisan affect items from the Pew American Trends Panel to test two competing hypotheses: that (1A-1) partisan affect is one-dimensional, or that (1A-2) partisan affect is two-dimensional. Results suggested support for Hypothesis 1A-2; two dimensions of partisan affect covered inparty affinity and outparty animosity. Second, Study 1B investigated the predictive validity of different aspects of partisan affect in terms of discrete forms of political participation. Study 1B had three competing hypotheses implied by prior partisan affect literature: that (1B-1) outparty animosity (but not inparty affinity) would predict most forms of behavior, that (1B-2) outparty animosity would predict higher-cost forms of behavior, and inparty affinity would predict lower-cost forms of behavior, or that (1B-3) the combination/interaction of outparty animosity and inparty affinity would predict most forms of behavior. Results of logistic regressions suggested partial support for Hypothesis 1B-1 and direct support for Hypothesis 1B-2. Outparty animosity predicted more medium-cost forms of political participation, whereas inparty affinity predicted lower-cost forms of political participation. Implications are discussed for theory, the measurement of partisan affect, and the prediction of political participation.
    en_US
  • Publication status
    publishedVersion
  • Review status
    peerReviewed
  • Citation
    Wiezel, A. & Wagner, J. K. (2023). The dual nature of American partisan affect: Examining the impact of inparty affinity and outparty animosity on unique forms of political behavior. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 11(1), 272-290. https://doi.org/10.5964/jspp.8135
    en_US
  • ISSN
    2195-3325
  • Persistent Identifier
    https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12034/9133
  • Persistent Identifier
    https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.13653
  • Language of content
    eng
  • Publisher
    PsychOpen GOLD
  • Is version of
    https://doi.org/10.5964/jspp.8135
  • Is related to
    https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.12853
  • Keyword(s)
    political affect
    en_US
  • Keyword(s)
    political polarization
    en_US
  • Keyword(s)
    affective polarization
    en_US
  • Keyword(s)
    political participation
    en_US
  • Keyword(s)
    factor analysis
    en_US
  • Dewey Decimal Classification number(s)
    150
  • Title
    The dual nature of American partisan affect: Examining the impact of inparty affinity and outparty animosity on unique forms of political behavior
    en_US
  • DRO type
    article
  • Issue
    1
  • Journal title
    Journal of Social and Political Psychology
  • Page numbers
    272–290
  • Volume
    11
  • Visible tag(s)
    Version of Record
    en_US