Political Partisanship as a Social Identity - Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics
The partisanship in this country has become so strong that even millennials can't kill it. [Read more: We've turned American politics into a football game] I am not arguing that we should date people whose core ideology is. So should you plunge back into the dating game, and how quickly? The final indicator is your physical desire for sex, she says. On the topic. In this neck-and-neck, ideologically fraught presidential election season, politically active singles won't cross party lines. The result is a dating.
If you look at the UK General Household Surveythe average age for men to get married is 34 and for women is Sociologist Anthony Paik surveyed adults and asked how they got together in the first place and how happy they were now. He found that although the relationship quality was higher for those who first had sex when they were in a serious relationship with their partner, this difference can be accounted for by the selection process we use when we're picking a serious partner.
Boynton says "a lot of online dating sites pride themselves on the number of successful matches they make. If you look at the research coming out of dating websites themselves, there's only about a 1 in 10 chance of meeting someone and going on a date with them if you're internet dating.
The problem with believing these statistics is that they're not available to independent researchers to validate.
Wall Street Journal | Selective Search
Given the lack of good news for singletons so far, can science step in to teach us how to date? Researchers might be able to explode many of the myths of dating, but the methodology used is far from perfect.
Most research relies on surveys, where the group responding may have a viewpoint that is not representative of the general population. They also might not remember facts correctly or might have been inappropriately chosen.
Women are more likely to answer than men. When researchers ask people to recount stories of their lives, memories can be selective.
Your political party shouldn't determine the person you date
There is also understandably little interest from funders of research to look into our dating habits. And those companies that do the surveys, such as internet dating websites, have an agenda. Nevertheless, the differentiation of expressive and instrumental aspects of partisanship is important for several reasons.
First, the two models construe democratic citizens differently. In the instrumental model, voters resemble the ideal citizen who is capable of and presumably willing to competently navigate the political environment and make political decisions based on careful examination of the political choices at hand.
In contrast, in the expressive model, voters are motivated to defend the party in order to maintain its positive standing underlining the tribal nature of politics. In that sense, an expressive model of partisanship also provides a motive for biased reasoning.
This process generates attitude stability and maintains political beliefs. It is also at odds with an instrumental model in which partisans are thought to evenhandedly consider political information. Second, the instrumental and expressive model also have different implications for democratic accountability: This should lead, in turn, to the enactment of legislation consistent with those preferences.
But if campaign engagement involves expressive partisanship, its policy implications are less clear and its advancement of normative democratic goals is less certain. To the extent to which these conflicted conservatives work on behalf of Republican candidates as some surely dothey send a distorted political signal in support of candidates who do not promote their policy goals.
Did you solve it? The dating game
Third, from a practical political standpoint campaigns can be run very differently if voters are driven to take action on the basis of expressive versus instrumental considerations. A candidate facing an electorate engaged by instrumental concerns needs to focus on policy. In contrast, a candidate facing supporters with highly expressive partisan concerns can run a campaign built more on slogan than on substance.
For example, generating anger at the opposing side is a highly effective way to elicit political engagement and action.
Did you solve it? The dating game | Science | The Guardian
For these reasons, it is important to assess more fully the extent to which partisanship is driven by instrumental and expressive considerations.
Partisanship as a Social Identity Social identity theory provides a strong foundation for the study of partisanship and political involvement. A social identity involves a subjective sense of belonging to a group, which is internalized to varying degrees, resulting in individual differences in identity strength, a desire to positively distinguish the group from others, and the development of ingroup bias Tajfel, In contrast to other intergroup research paradigms such as realistic group conflict theory, social identity theory does not focus on competition over scarce resources as a driver of group identity and intergroup conflict.
Instead, the motivation to protect and advance group status is a cornerstone of the social identity approach and the psychological foundation for the development of ingroup bias. The social identity model of partisan politics may be even easier to understand when placed in the context of sports teams. The motivational underpinnings of social identity theory are central to understanding its expressive nature and ability to motivate political action. In that sense, social identity theory provides a more complete and dynamic account of expressive partisanship than is found in previous political behavior research.
While the impact of partisan identities is well documented, the next challenge is to obtain a better understanding of their origins.
Social categorization theory forms the cognitive underpinning of social identity theory Turner et al. In social categorization theory, groups are cognitively represented by prototypes—typical members who define the group and convey information about the central characteristics of group members.
Prototypes can also be equated with group stereotypes. Based on their perceived similarity with these prototypes or group stereotypes, people estimate how well they match the party profile. Partisan prototypes or stereotypes are long-lasting which helps to explain why partisanship is relatively stable despite changes in party platform and economic performance. From this perspective, partisanship is the result of a cognitive matching process in which people compare their self-image to the types of people and social groups that are associated with a political party and then sort themselves politically on that basis.
- In This Article
- Leonie Huddy and Alexa Bankert
Identities also form through the merger of component demographic identities based on race, ethnicity, gender, and class. Social identity theory underscores the power of identity convergence, which can create especially powerful identities.
Roccas and Brewer develop the concept of identity complexity to capture this dynamic. Masonhas demonstrated this process in the United States where evangelical, conservative, and Republican identities have merged, as have black, secular, liberal, and Democratic identities.
In other countries, parties are likely to be especially strong and politically consequential when based on religious, regional, and ethnic identities, such as the Scottish National Party in the UK or the Sweden Democrats who married social conservatism with a strong nationalistic identity.
When fully developed, both the motivational and cognitive aspects of social identity contribute to an understanding of partisanship.
The greater levels of political engagement observed among partisans are motivated by their defense of the party.