bifurcations; nonlinear dynamics; political elites; political polarization; public opinion; Multidisciplinary
Abstract :
[en] Using a general model of opinion dynamics, we conduct a systematic investigation of key mechanisms driving elite polarization in the United States. We demonstrate that the self-reinforcing nature of elite-level processes can explain this polarization, with voter preferences accounting for its asymmetric nature. Our analysis suggests that subtle differences in the frequency and amplitude with which public opinion shifts left and right over time may have a differential effect on the self-reinforcing processes of elites, causing Republicans to polarize more quickly than Democrats. We find that as self-reinforcement approaches a critical threshold, polarization speeds up. Republicans appear to have crossed that threshold while Democrats are currently approaching it.
Disciplines :
Engineering, computing & technology: Multidisciplinary, general & others
Author, co-author :
Leonard, Naomi Ehrich ; Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544, naomi@princeton.edu keena.lipsitz@qc.cuny.edu
Lipsitz, Keena ; Department of Political Science, Queens College and The Graduate Center, City University of New York, Flushing, NY 11367, naomi@princeton.edu keena.lipsitz@qc.cuny.edu
Bizyaeva, Anastasia ; Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544
Franci, Alessio ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Département d'électricité, électronique et informatique (Institut Montefiore) > Brain-Inspired Computing ; Department of Mathematics, National Autonomous University of Mexico, 04510 Mexico City, Mexico, and
Lelkes, Yphtach ; Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104
Language :
English
Title :
The nonlinear feedback dynamics of asymmetric political polarization.
Publication date :
14 December 2021
Journal title :
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
UNAM - National Autonomous University of Mexico CONACYT - Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología NSF - National Science Foundation
Funding text :
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. We are grateful to the anonymous reviewers for many helpful comments. This research was supported by Dirección General de Asuntos del Personal Académico (DGAPA), National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), through the Programa de Apoyo a Proyectos de Investigación e Innovación Tecnológica (PAPIIT) research grant IN102420, and by Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología (Conacyt) through the research grant CB-A1-S-10610 (to A.F.) and by the NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Program under Grant DGE-2039656 (to A.B.). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF.We are grateful to the anonymous reviewers for many helpful comments. This research was supported by Direccion General de Asuntos del Personal Academico (DGAPA), National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), through the Programa de Apoyo a Proyectos de Investigacion e Innovacion Tecnologica (PAPIIT) research grant IN102420, and by Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnolog?a (Conacyt) through the research grant CB-A1-S-10610 (to A.F.) and by the NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Program under Grant DGE-2039656 (to A.B.). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF. DGAPA-PAPIIT UNAM
scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.
Bibliography
S. Levitsky, D. Ziblatt, How Democracies Die (Broadway Books, 2018).
F. E. Lee, Beyond Ideology: Politics, Principles, and Partisanship in the US Senate (University of Chicago Press, 2009).
M. Fiorina, S. Abrams, Disconnect: The Breakdown of Representation in American Politics (University of Oklahoma Press, 2012).
P. Pierson, Increasing returns, path dependence, and the study of politics. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 94, 251–267 (2000).
P. Pierson, E. Schickler, Madison’s constitution under stress: A developmental analysis of political polarization. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 23, 37–58 (2020).
N. McCarty, Polarization: What Everyone Needs to Know (Oxford University Press, 2019).
M. Grossmann, D. A. Hopkins, Asymmetric Politics: Ideological Republicans and Group Interest Democrats (Oxford University Press, 2016).
T. Mann, N. Ornstein, It’s Even Worse Than It Looks: How the American Constitutional System Collided With the New Politics of Extremism (Basic Books, 2016).
F. E. Lee, Patronage, logrolls, and “polarization”: Congressional parties of the gilded age, 1876-1896. Stud. Am. Polit. Dev. 30, 116 (2016).
N. McCarty, In defense of DW-NOMINATE. Stud. Am. Polit. Dev. 30, 172 (2016).
S. Gailmard, J. A. Jenkins, Distributive politics and congressional voting: Public lands reform in the Jacksonian era. Public Choice 175, 259–275 (2018).
D. DiSalvo, Engines of Change: Party Factions in American Politics, 1868-2010 (Oxford University Press, 2012).
H. Noel, Political Ideologies and Political Parties in America (Cambridge University Press, 2014).
T. Skocpol, A. Hertel-Fernandez, The Koch network and Republican Party extremism. Perspect. Polit. 14, 681–699 (2016).
A. Abramowitz, The Disappearing Center: Engaged Citizens, Polarization, and American Democracy (Yale University Press, 2010).
M. Fiorina, S. Abrams, J. Pope, Culture War: The Myth of a Polarized America (Long-man, 2005).
Y. Lelkes, P. M. Sniderman, The ideological asymmetry of the American party system. Br. J. Polit. Sci. 46, 825–844 (2016).
S. W. Webster, American Rage: How Anger Shapes our Politics (Cambridge University Press, 2020).
C. Wlezien, The public as thermostat: Dynamics of preferences for spending. Am. J. Pol. Sci. 39, 981–1000 (1995).
R. Erikson, M. MacKuen, J. Stimson, The Macro Polity (Cambridge University Press, 2002).
J. Stimson, Public Opinion in America: Moods, Cycles, and Swings (Routledge, 2018).
A. Bizyaeva, A. Franci, N. E. Leonard, Nonlinear opinion dynamics with tunable sensitivity. arXiv [Preprint] (2020). https://arxiv.org/abs/2009.04332. (Accessed 6 September 2021).
A. Franci, A. Bizyaeva, S. Park, N. E. Leonard, Analysis and control of agreement and disagreement opinion cascades. Swarm Intell. 15, 47–82 (2021).
F. P. Santos, Y. Lelkes, S. A. Levin, Link recommendation algorithms and dynamics of polarization in online social networks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 118, e102141118 (2021).
S. Callander, J. C. Carbajal, Cause and effect in political polarization: A dynamic analysis. J. Polit. Econ., in press.
J. Stimson, Data from “Public Policy Mood” (2021). https://stimson.web.unc.edu/data/. (Accessed 6 September 2021).
S. Soroka, C. Wlezien, Degrees of Democracy: Politics, Public Opinion, and Policy (Cambridge University Press, 2010).
K. Bawn et al., A theory of political parties: Groups, policy demands and nominations in American politics. Perspect. Polit. 10, 571–597 (2012).
B. Highton, Issue accountability in US House elections. Polit. Behav. 41, 349–367 (2019).
D. Caughey, C. Warshaw, Policy preferences and policy change: Dynamic responsiveness in the American states, 1936–2014. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 112, 249–266 (2018).
T. Mann, N. Ornstein, The Broken Branch: How Congress is Failing America and How to Get it Back on Track (Oxford University Press, 2006).
S. Page, Path dependence. Quart. J. Polit. Sci. 1, 87–115 (2006).
Toward a more responsible two party system: A report of the Committee on Political Parties. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 44, 1–96 (1950).
S. A. Binder, Stalemate: Causes and Consequences of Legislative Gridlock (Brookings Institution Press, 2004).
L. Mason, Uncivil Agreement: How Politics Became our Identity (University of Chicago Press, 2018).
This website uses cookies to improve user experience. Read more
Save & Close
Accept all
Decline all
Show detailsHide details
Cookie declaration
About cookies
Strictly necessary
Performance
Strictly necessary cookies allow core website functionality such as user login and account management. The website cannot be used properly without strictly necessary cookies.
This cookie is used by Cookie-Script.com service to remember visitor cookie consent preferences. It is necessary for Cookie-Script.com cookie banner to work properly.
Performance cookies are used to see how visitors use the website, eg. analytics cookies. Those cookies cannot be used to directly identify a certain visitor.
Used to store the attribution information, the referrer initially used to visit the website
Cookies are small text files that are placed on your computer by websites that you visit. Websites use cookies to help users navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. Cookies that are required for the website to operate properly are allowed to be set without your permission. All other cookies need to be approved before they can be set in the browser.
You can change your consent to cookie usage at any time on our Privacy Policy page.
