Premium
Polarizing Cues
Author(s) -
Nicholson Stephen P.
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
american journal of political science
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 6.347
H-Index - 170
eISSN - 1540-5907
pISSN - 0092-5853
DOI - 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2011.00541.x
Subject(s) - ingroups and outgroups , political science , categorization , presidential system , outgroup , social psychology , politics , position (finance) , function (biology) , psychology , law , business , epistemology , philosophy , finance , evolutionary biology , biology
People categorize themselves and others, creating ingroup and outgroup distinctions. In American politics, parties constitute the in‐ and outgroups, and party leaders hold sway in articulating party positions. A party leader's endorsement of a policy can be persuasive, inducing co‐partisans to take the same position. In contrast, a party leader's endorsement may polarize opinion, inducing out‐party identifiers to take a contrary position. Using survey experiments from the 2008 presidential election, I examine whether in‐ and out‐party candidate cues—John McCain and Barack Obama—affected partisan opinion. The results indicate that in‐party leader cues do not persuade but that out‐party leader cues polarize. This finding holds in an experiment featuring President Bush in which his endorsement did not persuade Republicans but it polarized Democrats. Lastly, I compare the effect of party leader cues to party label cues. The results suggest that politicians, not parties, function as polarizing cues.