Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-684899dbb8-5dd2w Total loading time: 0.248 Render date: 2022-05-22T14:45:16.715Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true }

Understanding Polarization: Meanings, Measures, and Model Evaluation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Abstract

Polarization is a topic of intense interest among social scientists, but there is significant disagreement regarding the character of the phenomenon and little understanding of underlying mechanics. A first problem, we argue, is that polarization appears in the literature as not one concept but many. In the first part of the article, we distinguish nine phenomena that may be considered polarization, with suggestions of appropriate measures for each. In the second part of the article, we apply this analysis to evaluate the types of polarization generated by the three major families of computational models proposing specific mechanisms of opinion polarization.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of 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.)

Footnotes

We are especially thankful to Jiin Jung and various conference audiences for their incredibly helpful feedback on previous versions of this research.

References

Abell, Peter. 1968. “Structural Balance in Dynamic Structures.” Sociology 2:333–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abelson, Robert P. 1964. “Mathematical Models of the Distribution of Attitudes under Controversy.” Contributions to Mathematical Psychology 14:1160.Google Scholar
Axelrod, Robert. 1997. “The Dissemination of Culture: A Model with Local Convergence and Global Polarization.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 41:203–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bicchieri, Cristina. 2006. The Grammar of Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bramson, Aaron, Grim, Patrick, Singer, Daniel J., Fisher, Steven, Berger, William, Sack, Graham, and Flocken, Carissa. 2016. “Disambiguation of Social Polarization Concepts and Measures.” Journal of Mathematical Sociology 40 (2): 80111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brownstein, Ronald. 2007. The Second Civil War: How Extreme Partisanship Has Paralyzed Washington and Polarized America. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
Cartwright, Dorwin, and Harary, Frank. 1956. “Structural Balance: A Generalization of Heider’s Theory.” Psychological Review 63 (5): 277–93.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Centola, Damon, Gonzalez-Avella, Juan Carlos, Eguiluz, Victor M., and Miguel, Maxi San. 2007. “Homophily, Cultural Drift, and the Co-evolution of Cultural Groups.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 51:905–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, Joel, Kelly, Kimberly A., and Weaver, Kimberlee. 2001. “Attitudes, Norms, and Social Groups.” In Blackwell Handbook of Social Psychology: Group Processes, ed. Hogg, Michael A. and Tindale, R. Scott, 259–82. Malden, MA: Oxford.Google Scholar
De Dreu, Carsten K. W., Greer, Lindred L., Handgraaf, Michel J. J., Shalvi, Shaul, Van Kleef, Gerben A., Baas, Matthijs, Ten Velden, Femke S., Dijk, Eric Van, and Feith, Sander W. W.. 2010. “The Neuropeptide Oxytocin Regulates Parochial Altruism in Intergroup Conflict among Humans.” Science 328 (5984): 1408–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Dreu, Carsten K. W., Greer, Lindred L., Van Kleef, Gerben A., Shalvi, Shaul, and Handgraaf, Michel J. J.. 2011. “Oxytocin Promotes Human Ethnocentrism.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108 (4): 1262–66.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Deffuant, Guillaume. 2006. “Comparing Extremism Propagation Patterns in Continuous Opinion Models.” Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 9, no. 3.Google Scholar
Deffuant, Guillaume, Amblard, Frédéric, Weisbuch, Gérard, and Faure, Thierry. 2002. “How Can Extremism Prevail? A Study Based on the Relative Agreement Interaction Model.” Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 5, no. 4.Google Scholar
DeGroot, Morris H. 1974. “Reaching a Consensus.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 69 (345): 118–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DiMaggio, Paul, Evans, John, and Bryson, Bethany. 1996. “Have Americans’ Social Attitudes Become More Polarized?American Journal of Sociology 102:690755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downey, Dennis J., and Huffman, Matt L.. 2001. “Attitudinal Polarization and Trimodal Distributions: Measurement Problems and Theoretical Implications.” Social Science Quarterly 82 (3): 494505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Druckman, James, Peterson, Erik, and Slothuus, Rune. 2013. “How Elite Partisan Polarization Affects Public Opinion Formation.” American Political Science Review 107 (1): 5779.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epstein, Joshua M. 2006. Generative Social Science: Studies in Agent-Based Computational Modeling. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Epstein, Joshua M. 2008. “Why Model?” Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 11, no. 4.Google Scholar
Epstein, Joshua M., and Axtell, Robert. 1996. Growing Artificial Societies: Social Science from the Bottom Up. Washington, DC: Brookings.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epstein, Joshua M., Lemon, S. M., Hamberg, M. A., Sparling, F., Choffnes, E. R., and Mack, A.. 2007. “Remarks on the Role of Modeling in Infectious Disease Mitigation and Containment.” In Ethical and Legal Considerations in Mitigating Pandemic Disease: Workshop Summary; Forum on Microbial Threats. Washington, DC: National Academies.Google Scholar
Facchetti, Giuseppe, Iacono, Giovanni, and Altafini, Claudio. 2011. “Computing Global Structural Balance in Large-Scale Signed Social Networks.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108 (52): 20953–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fiorina, Morris P., and Abrams, Samuel J.. 2008. “Political Polarization in the American Public.” Annual Review of Political Science 11:563–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiorina, Morris P., Abrams, Samuel J., and Pope, Jeremy C.. 2005. Culture War? The Myth of a Polarized America. New York: Pearson Longman.Google Scholar
Flache, Andreas, and Macy, Michael W.. 2006a. “What Sustains Cultural Diversity and What Undermines It? Axelrod and Beyond.” arXiv preprint physics/0604201.Google Scholar
Flache, Andreas, and Macy, Michael W. 2006b. “Why More Contact May Increase Cultural Polarization.” arXiv preprint physics/0604196.Google Scholar
Forman, S. Eagle. 1900. The Life and Writings of Thomas Jefferson: Including All of His Important Utterances on Public Questions, Comp. from State Papers and from His Private Correspondence. Indianapolis: Bowen-Merrill.Google Scholar
French, John R. P. 1956. “A Formal Theory of Social Power.” Psychological Review 63 (3): 181–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grim, Patrick, Rosenberger, Robert, Rosenfeld, Adam, Anderson, Brian, and Eason, Robb E.. 2013. “How Simulations Fail.” Synthese 190 (12): 2367–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Großer, Jens, and Palfrey, Thomas R.. 2013. “Candidate Entry and Political Polarization: An Antimedian Voter Theorem.” American Journal of Political Science 58 (1): 127–43.Google Scholar
Hacking, Ian. 1999. The Social Construction of What? Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Harary, Frank. 1959. “On the Measurement of Structural Balance.” Behavioral Science 4 (4): 316–23.Google Scholar
Hart, Jeffrey. 1974. “Symmetry and Polarization in the European International System, 1870–1879: A Methodological Study.” Journal of Peace Research 11 (3): 229–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hegselmann, Rainer, and Krause, Ulrich. 2002. “Opinion Dynamics and Bounded Confidence Models, Analysis, and Simulation.” Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 5, no. 3.Google Scholar
Hegselmann, Rainer, and Krause, Ulrich 2005. “Opinion Dynamics Driven by Various Ways of Averaging.” Computational Economics 25 (4): 381405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hegselmann, Rainer, and Krause, Ulrich 2006. “Truth and Cognitive Division of Labour: First Steps towards a Computer Aided Social Epistemology.” Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 9, no. 3.Google Scholar
Heider, F. 1946. “Attitudes and Cognitive Organization.” Journal of Psychology 21:107–22.Google ScholarPubMed
Hetherington, Marc J., and Weiler, Jonathan D.. 2009. Authoritarianism and Polarization in American Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hogg, Michael, Turner, John C., and Davidson, Barbara. 1990. “Polarized Norms and Social Frames of Reference: A Test of the Self-Categorization Theory of Group Polarization.” Basic and Applied Social Psychology 11 (1): 77100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopfield, J. J. 1982. “Neural Networks and Physical Systems with Emergent Collective Computational Abilities.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 79:2554–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hummon, Norman P., and Doreian, Patrick. 2003. “Some Dynamics of Social Balance Processes: Bringing Heider Back into Balance Theory.” Social Networks 25:1749.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
Kitts, James A. 2006. “Social Influence and the Emergence of Norms Amid Ties of Amity and Enmity.” Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory 14:407–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klemm, Konstantin, Eguiluz, Victor M., Toral, Raul, and Miguel, Maxi San. 2003a. “Global Culture: A Noise-Induced Transition in Finite Systems.” Physical Review E, 67.Google Scholar
Klemm, Konstantin, Eguiluz, Victor M., Toral, Raul, and Miguel, Maxi San 2003b. “Nonequilibrium Transitions in Complex Networks: A Model of Social Interaction.” Physical Review E, 67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klemm, Konstantin, Eguiluz, Victor M., Toral, Raul, and Miguel, Maxi San 2003c. “Role of Dimensionality in Axelrod’s Model for the Dissemination of Culture.” Physica A 327 (1): 15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klemm, Konstantin, Eguiluz, Victor M., Toral, Raul, and Miguel, Maxi San 2005. “Globalization, Polarization and Cultural Drift.” Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 29 (1): 321–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhn, Deanna, and Lao, Joseph. 1996. “Effects of Evidence on Attitudes: Is Polarization the Norm?Psychological Science 7 (2): 115–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kulakowski, K., Gawronski, P., and Gronek, P.. 2005. “The Heider Balance: A Continuous Approach.” International Journal of Modern Physics C 16:707–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kunegis, Jérôme. 2014. “Applications of Structural Balance in Signed Social Networks.” arXiv preprint arXiv:1402.6865.Google Scholar
Lauderdale, Benjamin E. 2013. “Does Inattention to Political Debate Explain the Polarization Gap between the U.S. Congress and Public?Public Opinion Quarterly 77:223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leeper, Thomas J. 2014. “The Informational Basis for Mass Polarization.” Public Opinion Quarterly 78 (1): 2746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levendusky, Matthew S. 2013. “Why Do Partisan Media Polarize Viewers?American Journal of Political Science 57 (3): 611–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lord, Charles G., Ross, Lee, and Lepper, Mark R.. 1979. “Biased Assimilation and Attitude Polarization: The Effects of Prior Theories on Subsequently Considered Evidence.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 37 (11): 20982109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macy, Michael W., Kitts, James A., Flache, Andreas, and Benard, Steve. 2003. “Polarization in Dynamic Networks: A Hopfield Model of Emergent Structure.” In Dynamic Social Network Modeling and Analysis: Workshop Summary and Papers. Washington, DC: National Academies.Google Scholar
Mason, Lilliana. 2015. “I Disrespectfully Agree: The Differential Effects of Partisan Sorting on Social and Issue Polarization.” American Journal of Political Science 59 (1): 128–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarty, Nolan, Poole, Keith T., and Rosenthal, Howard. 2008. Polarized America: The Dance of Ideology and Unequal Riches. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Meadows, Michael, and Cliff, Dave. 2012. “Reexamining the Relative Agreement Model of Opinion Dynamics.” Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 15, no. 4.Google Scholar
Miller, Arthur G., McHoskey, John W., Bane, Cynthia M., and Dowd, Timothy G.. 1993. “The Attitude Polarization Phenomenon: Role of Response Measure, Attitude Extremity, and Behavioral Consequences of Reported Attitude Change.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 64 (4): 561–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, John H., Page, Scott E., and LeBaron, Blake. 2008. Complex Adaptive Systems: An Introduction to Computational Models of Social Life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Prior, Markus. 2013. “Media and Political Polarization.” Annual Review of Political Science 16:101–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sack, Graham, Flocken, Carissa, Grim, Patrick, Bramson, Aaron, and Berger, William. 2014. “Neural Networks, Social Contexts: A Hopfield Model of Opinion Polarization.” International Political Science Association, Montreal. http://paperroom.ipsa.org/papers/paper_32460.pdf.Google Scholar
Thomsen, Danielle M. 2014. “Ideological Moderates Won’t Run: How Party Fit Matters for Partisan Polarization in Congress.” Journal of Politics 76 (3): 786–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ura, Joseph Daniel, and Ellis, Christopher R.. 2012. “Partisan Moods: Polarization and the Dynamics of Mass Party Preferences.” Journal of Politics 74 (1): 227–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Zhigang, and Thorngate, Warren. 2003. “Sentiment and Social Mitosis: Implications of Heider’s Balance Theory.” Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 6, no. 3.Google Scholar
Weinschenk, Aaron C. 2014. “Polarization, Ideology, and Vote Choice in US Congressional Elections.” Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties 24 (1): 7389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
38
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Understanding Polarization: Meanings, Measures, and Model Evaluation
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Understanding Polarization: Meanings, Measures, and Model Evaluation
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Understanding Polarization: Meanings, Measures, and Model Evaluation
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *