However, political polarization can also be bad for democracy, increasing the centralization of power (Lee, 2015), congressional gridlock (Jones, 2001), and making citizens less satisfied (Wagner, 2021). Higher levels of polarization can be beneficial for society – predicting higher levels of political participation, and perceptions of electoral choice (Wagner, 2021). Affective polarization assesses the extent to which people like (or feel warmth towards) their political allies and dislike (or feel lack of warmth towards) their political opponents (Iyengar et al., 2012). Gaertner et al., 1993 Iyengar et al., 2012). political parties) can exacerbate out-group animosity (e.g. The second is affective polarization, which is based on work considering the role of identity in politics (Mason, 2018), and how identity salience within groups (e.g. The first is ideological polarization, which is the divergence of political opinions, beliefs, attitudes, and stances of political adversaries (Dalton, 1987). 1 There are two distinct forms of political polarization. Today political elites (Heaney et al., 2012), elected officials (Hare & Poole, 2014), and everyday people (Frimer et al., 2017) are polarized. Political polarization is on the rise not only in the United States (Arceneaux et al., 2013 see also Abramowitz & Saunders, 2008 Pew Research Center, 2017), but also across the world (Gidron et al., 2019). The role of (social) media in political polarization: a systematic review
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |