|
Size: 1335
Comment: Initial commit
|
← Revision 8 as of 2025-06-18 15:56:33 ⇥
Size: 2275
Comment: Minor fix
|
| Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
| Line 13: | Line 13: |
| Party polarization is a very loose framework that simply prescribes studying political polarization in terms of political parties, as opposed to behavioral theory. | Party polarization is a very loose framework that simply prescribes studying political polarization in terms of political parties, as opposed to [[PoliticalScience/AffectivePolarization|behavioral theory]]. These theories generally assume that 'partisanship' or 'extremism' is defined by consistent ideological opinions. The counter-example is that a moderate's opinions are either not strongly held or ideologically-inconsistent (suggesting they are informed by something external). |
| Line 16: | Line 18: |
| * Behavioral theories such as: | * Choice models including: |
| Line 29: | Line 31: |
| * [[IsPolarizationAMyth|Is Polarization a Myth?]], Alan I. Abramowitz and Kyle L. Saunders, 2008 * [[DoesPolarizationIncreaseParticipation|Does polarization increase participation? A systematic literature review and meta-analysis]], Marta Kołczyńska, 2025 * [[TheUrbanRuralDivideInPolicyPreferencesAcrossTimeAndSpace|The urban-rural divide in policy priorities across time and space]], Tevfik Murat Yildirim and Knut M. Solvig, 2025 * [[TheDirectionAndMeaningOfLeftRightInPostcommunistSocieties|The Direction and Meaning of Left-Right in Postcommunist Societies]], Ruth Dassonneville and Ian Mc``Allister, 2025 |
Party Polarization
Party polarization is a general framework that formulated political polarization in terms of political parties.
Contents
Description
Party polarization is a very loose framework that simply prescribes studying political polarization in terms of political parties, as opposed to behavioral theory.
These theories generally assume that 'partisanship' or 'extremism' is defined by consistent ideological opinions. The counter-example is that a moderate's opinions are either not strongly held or ideologically-inconsistent (suggesting they are informed by something external).
There are many closely-related fields in the public choice and political philosophy spaces.
- Choice models including:
Median voter theorem, for why polarization is not expected.
Pivotal politics model, for how the appearance of polarization can be achieved without an actual political undercurrent.
Critical theories, e.g. Marxism, have a clear interpretation of both polarization (i.e., history of conflict) and lack of polarization (i.e., elites suppressing consciousness).
Polarization is a topic of study in the field of institutional design.
Reading Notes
Ideological Realignment and Active Partisans in the American Electorate, Alan I. Abramowitz and Kyle L. Saunders, 2004
Is Polarization a Myth?, Alan I. Abramowitz and Kyle L. Saunders, 2008
Does polarization increase participation? A systematic literature review and meta-analysis, Marta Kołczyńska, 2025
The urban-rural divide in policy priorities across time and space, Tevfik Murat Yildirim and Knut M. Solvig, 2025
The Direction and Meaning of Left-Right in Postcommunist Societies, Ruth Dassonneville and Ian McAllister, 2025