Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 45
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Bianchi, Alison J. Ruch, Alexander M. Ritter, Michael J. and Kim, Ji Hye 2016. Emotion Management: Unexpected Research Opportunities. Sociology Compass, Vol. 10, Issue. 2, p. 172.

    Davis, Nicholas T. and Dunaway, Johanna L. 2016. Party Polarization, Media Choice, and Mass Partisan-Ideological Sorting. Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 80, Issue. S1, p. 272.

    Gupta, Abhinav Briscoe, Forrest and Hambrick, Donald C. 2016. Red, blue, and purple firms: Organizational political ideology and corporate social responsibility. Strategic Management Journal,

    Harrison, Brian F. 2016. Bully Partisan or Partisan Bully?: Partisanship, Elite Polarization, and U.S. Presidential Communication*. Social Science Quarterly, Vol. 97, Issue. 2, p. 418.

    Hetherington, Marc J. Long, Meri T. and Rudolph, Thomas J. 2016. Revisiting the Myth. Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 80, Issue. S1, p. 321.

    Rapp, Carolin 2016. Moral opinion polarization and the erosion of trust. Social Science Research, Vol. 58, p. 34.

    Smith, Heidi Jane M. and Revell, Keith D. 2016. Micro-Incentives and Municipal Behavior: Political Decentralization and Fiscal Federalism in Argentina and Mexico. World Development, Vol. 77, p. 231.

    Wattenberg, Martin P. 2016. The Declining Relevance of Candidate Personal Attributes in Presidential Elections. Presidential Studies Quarterly, Vol. 46, Issue. 1, p. 125.

    Zhu, Hongjin and Yoshikawa, Toru 2016. Contingent value of director identification: The role of government directors in monitoring and resource provision in an emerging economy. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 37, Issue. 8, p. 1787.

    Can, Burak Ozkes, Ali Ihsan and Storcken, Ton 2015. Measuring polarization in preferences. Mathematical Social Sciences, Vol. 78, p. 76.

    Garcia, David Abisheva, Adiya Schweighofer, Simon Serdült, Uwe and Schweitzer, Frank 2015. Ideological and Temporal Components of Network Polarization in Online Political Participatory Media. Policy & Internet, Vol. 7, Issue. 1, p. 46.

    Grose, Christian R. Malhotra, Neil and Parks Van Houweling, Robert 2015. Explaining Explanations: How Legislators Explain their Policy Positions and How Citizens React. American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 59, Issue. 3, p. 724.

    Han, Sung Min 2015. Income inequality, electoral systems and party polarisation. European Journal of Political Research, Vol. 54, Issue. 3, p. 582.

    Iyengar, Shanto and Westwood, Sean J. 2015. Fear and Loathing across Party Lines: New Evidence on Group Polarization. American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 59, Issue. 3, p. 690.

    Lee, Jae Mook 2015. Assessing Mass Opinion Polarization in the US Using Relative Distribution Method. Social Indicators Research, Vol. 124, Issue. 2, p. 571.

    Lee, Frances E. 2015. How Party Polarization Affects Governance. Annual Review of Political Science, Vol. 18, Issue. 1, p. 261.

    Lupu, Noam 2015. Party Polarization and Mass Partisanship: A Comparative Perspective. Political Behavior, Vol. 37, Issue. 2, p. 331.

    Moses, Jennifer Filson and Gonzales, Marti Hope 2015. Strong Candidate, Nurturant Candidate: Moral Language in Presidential Television Advertisements. Political Psychology, Vol. 36, Issue. 4, p. 379.

    Pastine, Ivan Pastine, Tuvana and Redmond, Paul 2015. Incumbent-Quality Advantage and Counterfactual Electoral Stagnation in the US Senate. Politics, Vol. 35, Issue. 1, p. 32.

    Baker, Anne E. 2014. The Fading Exceptionalism of American Political Parties?: Evidence from Party Allocation Decisions. Comparative Sociology, Vol. 13, Issue. 3, p. 284.


Review Article: Putting Polarization in Perspective


Scholarly research has demonstrated rather conclusively that American political elites have undergone a marked partisan polarization over the past thirty years. There is less agreement, however, as to whether the American electorate is polarized. This review article evaluates the evidence, causes and consequences of polarization on both the elite and mass levels. A marked difference between the two is found. Elites are polarized by almost any definition, although this state of affairs is quite common historically. In contrast, mass attitudes are now better sorted by party, but generally not polarized. While it is unclear whether this potentially troubling disconnect between centrist mass attitudes and extreme elite preferences has negative policy consequences, it appears that the super-majoritarian nature of the US Senate serves as a bulwark against policy outcomes that are more ideologically extreme than the public would prefer. Moreover, a public more centrist than those who represent it has also at times exerted a moderating influence on recent policies.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

British Journal of Political Science
  • ISSN: 0007-1234
  • EISSN: 1469-2112
  • URL: /core/journals/british-journal-of-political-science
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *