Hostname: page-component-f554764f5-sl7kg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-11T14:42:26.068Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Social Groups as the Source of Political Belief Systems: Fresh Evidence on an Old Theory

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 April 2022

ELIZABETH MITCHELL ELDER Open the ORCID record for ELIZABETH MITCHELL ELDER [Opens in a new window]  and
NEIL A. O’BRIAN Open the ORCID record for NEIL A. O’BRIAN [Opens in a new window]
ELIZABETH MITCHELL ELDER*
Affiliation:
Princeton University, United States
NEIL A. O’BRIAN*
Affiliation:
University of Oregon, United States
*
Elizabeth Mitchell Elder, Senior Research Specialist, Mamdouha S. Bobst Center for Peace and Justice and Center for the Study of Democratic Politics, Princeton University, United States, [email protected].
Neil A. O’Brian, Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Oregon, United States, [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We present novel evidence that attitudes toward nonpartisan social groups structure political belief systems. First, we show that most Americans have a rich knowledge of the social groups that support and oppose group-related policies. This knowledge often exceeds people’s awareness of where Democrats and Republicans stand on these same issues. Then, we show that this knowledge promotes what Philip Converse called ideological coherence: Americans who know which groups support and oppose a policy are more likely to hold stable policy positions over time and to organize their attitudes into consistently liberal or conservative bundles. In the twentieth century, knowledge of social groups’ issue positions rivaled knowledge of parties’ positions in its ability to generate attitude stability and constraint. However, as party identification has strengthened in recent decades, knowledge of parties’ positions has become the most important source of structure in most Americans’ belief systems.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 116 , Issue 4 , November 2022 , pp. 1407 - 1424
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Achen, Christopher, and Bartels, Larry. 2017. Democracy for Realists: Why Elections Do Not Produce Responsive Government. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Ahler, Douglas J., and Sood, Gaurav. 2018. “The Parties in Our Heads: Misperceptions about Party Composition and Their Consequences.” The Journal of Politics 80 (3): 964–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anoll, Allison P. 2018. “What Makes a Good Neighbor? Race, Place, and Norms of Political Participation.” The American Political Science Review 112 (3): 494–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen, Rodden, Jonathan, and Snyder, James. 2008. “The Strength of Issues: Using Multiple Measures to Gauge Preference Stability, Ideological Constraint, and Issue Voting.” American Political Science Review 102 (2): 215–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aronow, Peter, Kalla, Josh, Orr, Lilia, and Ternovski, John. 2020. “Evidence of Rising Rates of Inattentiveness on Lucid in 2020.” Working Paper. https://osf.io/8sbe4/.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barber, Michael, and Pope, Jeremy. 2018. “Who is Ideological? Measuring Ideological Consistency in the American Public.” The Forum 16 (1): 97–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brady, Henry E., and Sniderman, Paul M.. 1985. “Attitude Attribution: A Group Basis for Political Reasoning.” American Political Science Review 79 (4): 1061–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conover, Pamela Johnston, and Feldman, Stanley. 1981. “The Origins and Meaning of Liberal/Conservative Self-Identifications.” American Journal of Political Science 25 (4): 617–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conover, Pamela Johnston, and Feldman, Stanley. 1984. “Group Identification, Values, and the Nature of Political Beliefs.” American Politics Quarterly 12 (2): 151–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Converse, Philip. 2006. “The Nature of Belief Systems in the Mass Publics (1964).” Critical Review 18 (1–3): 1–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crowder-Meyer, Melody, Gadarian, Shana Kushner, Trounstine, Jessica, and Vue, Kau. 2020. “A Different Kind of Disadvantage: Candidate Race, Cognitive Complexity, and Voter Choice.” Political Behavior 42 (2): 509–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dias, Nicholas, and Lelkes, Yphtach. 2021. “The Nature of Affective Polarization: Disentangling Policy Disagreement from Partisan Identity.” American Journal of Political Science (early view). https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12628.Google Scholar
Elder, Elizabeth Mitchell, and O’Brian, Neil A.. 2022. “Replication Data for: Social Groups as the Source of Political Belief Systems: Fresh Evidence on an Old Theory.” Harvard Dataverse. Dataset. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/IXTLRP.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeder, Sean, Lenz, Gabriel S., and Turney, Shad. 2019. “The Importance of Knowing “What Goes with What”: Reinterpreting the Evidence on Policy Attitude Stability.” The Journal of Politics 81 (1): 274–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilens, Martin. 2009. Why Americans Hate Welfare: Race, Media, and the Politics of Antipoverty Policy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hetherington, Marc. 2001. “Resurgent Mass Partisanship: The Role of Elite Polarization.” American Political Science Review 95 (3): 619–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huber, Gregory A., and Malhotra, Neil. 2017. “Political Homophily in Social Relationships: Evidence from Online Dating Behavior.” The Journal of Politics 79 (1): 269–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huddy, Leonie, Mason, Lilliana, and Aarøe, Lene. 2015. “Expressive Partisanship: Campaign Involvement, Political Emotion, and Partisan Identity.” American Political Science Review 109 (1): 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huddy, Leonie, and Yair, Omer. 2021. “Reducing Affective Polarization: Warm Group Relations or Policy Compromise?” Political Psychology 42 (2): 291–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iyengar, Shanto, Sood, Gaurav, and Lelkes, Yphtach. 2012. “Affect, Not Ideology: A Social Identity Perspective on Polarization.” Public Opinion Quarterly 76 (3): 405–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iyengar, Shanto, and Westwood, Sean J.. 2015. “Fear and Loathing across Party Lines: New Evidence on Group Polarization.” American Journal of Political Science 59 (3): 690–707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iyengar, Shanto, Lelkes, Yphtach, Levendusky, Matthew, Malhotra, Neil, and Westwood, Sean. 2019. “The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States.” Annual Review of Political Science 22: 129–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerlinger, Fred N. 1967. “Social Attitudes and Their Criterial Referents: A Structural Theory.” Psychological Review 74 (2): 110–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kinder, Donald, and Mendelberg, Tali. 2000. Individualism Reconsidered: Principles and Prejudice in Contemporary American Opinion. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Kinder, Donald R., and Kalmoe, Nathan P.. 2017. Neither Liberal nor Conservative: Ideological Innocence in the American Public. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lenz, Gabriel. 2012. Follow the Leader? How Voters Respond to Politicians’ Policies and Performance. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis-Beck, Michael S., Norpoth, Helmut, Jacoby, William, and Weisberg, Herbert F.. 2008. The American Voter Revisited. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lupia, Arthur. 2006. “How Elitism Undermines the Study of Voter Competence.” Critical Review 18 (1–3): 217–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, Lilliana. 2016. “A Cross-Cutting Calm: How Social Sorting Drives Affective Polarization.” Public Opinion Quarterly 80 (S1): 351–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, Lilliana. 2018. “Ideologues without Issues: The Polarizing Consequences of Ideological Identities.” Public Opinion Quarterly 82 (S1): 866–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, Lilliana, and Wronski, Julie. 2018. “One Tribe to Bind Them All: How Our Social Group Attachments Strengthen Partisanship.” Advances in Political Pyschology 39 (1): 257–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mendelberg, Tali. 2001. The Race Card: Campaign Strategy, Implicit Messages, and the Norm of Equality. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, Thomas E., and Kinder, Donald R.. 1996. “Issue Frames and Group-Centrism in American Public Opinion.” The Journal of Politics 58 (4): 1055–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orr, Lilla V., and Huber, Gregory A.. 2020. “The Policy Basis of Measured Partisan Animosity in the United States.” American Journal of Political Science 64 (3): 569–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petersen, Michael Bang, Slothuus, Rune, Stubager, Rune, and Togeby, Lise. 2011. “Deservingness versus Values in Public Opinion on Welfare: The Automaticity of the Deservingness Heuristic.” European Journal of Political Research 50 (1): 24–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schickler, Eric. 2016. Racial Realignment: The Transformation of American Liberalism, 1932–1965. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Schneider, Anne, and Ingram, Helen. 1993. “Social Construction of Target Populations: Implications for Politics and Policy.” American Political Science Review 87 (2): 334–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sears, David, and Funk, Carolyn. 1999. “Evidence of the Long-Term Persistence of Adults’ Political Predispositions.” The Journal of Politics 61 (1): 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sears, David O., Hensler, Carl P., and Speer, Leslie K.. 1979. “Whites’ Opposition to ‘Busing’: Self-Interest or Symbolic Politics?” American Political Science Review 73 (2): 369–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stoker, Laura, and McCall, Andrew. 2017. “The Quest for Representative Survey Samples.” In The Routledge Handbook of Elections, Voting Behavior and Public Opinion, eds. Fisher, Justin, Fieldhouse, Edward, Franklin, Mark N., Gibson, Rachel, Cantijoch, Marta, and Wlezien, Christopher, 458–71. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suhay, Elizabeth, Bello-Pardo, Emily, and Maurer, Brianna. 2018. “The Polarizing Effects of Online Partisan Criticism: Evidence from Two Experiments.” The International Journal of Press/Politics 23 (1): 95–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tajfel, Henri, and Turner, John C.. 1979. “An Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict.” In The Social Pyschology of Intergroup Relations, eds. Austin, William G. and Worchel, Stephen, 33–47. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar
Teele, Dawn Langan, Kalla, Joshua, and Rosenbluth, Frances. 2018. “The Ties That Double Bind: Social Roles and Women’s Underrepresentation in Politics.” American Political Science Review 112 (3): 525–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tesler, Michael. 2014. “Priming Predispositions and Changing Policy Positions: An Account of When Mass Opinion is Primed or Changed.” American Journal of Political Science 59 (4): 806–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tesler, Michael, and Sears, David. 2010. Obama’s Race: The 2008 Election and the Dream of a Post-Racial America. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, Ismail K., and Laird, Chryl N.. 2020. Steadfast Democrats: How Social Forces Shape Black Political Behavior. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Wronski, Julie, Kane, John V., and Mason, Lilliana. 2021. “Who’s at the Party? Group Sentiments, Knowledge, and Partisan Identity.” Journal of Politics 83 (4): 1783–99.Google Scholar
Zaller, John. 1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: Link

Elder and O’Brian Dataset

Dataset

https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/IXTLRP
Link
Supplementary material: PDF

Elder and O’Brian supplementary material

Elder and O’Brian supplementary material

Download Elder and O’Brian supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 272.4 KB
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.