PRL at NGA’s Disagree Better Convening
September 12, 2023 — PRL Director Sean Westwood presented on a panel in Manchester, NH, at the National Governors Association Disagree Better Convening. The event featured discussions with leading, bipartisan experts and focused on “Correcting Misperceptions and Highlighting Commonalities.” The NGA civility initiative, led by NGA Chair Governor Cox (R-UT) and Vice-Chair Governor Polis (D-CO), aligns with PRL’s research demonstrating that reducing partisan animosity and correcting misperceptions in America requires an elite-led approach. In fact, correcting misperceptions among citizens may first necessitate correcting a misperception among elites that negativity is an effective strategy. Our work shows that public misperceptions are…
Not All Elections are Presidential: But They Might Be More Partisan Than Ever
Derek Holliday Do presidential nominees dictate the fortunes of down-ballot candidates? While this has been a growing concern of many political commentators, I find evidence that elections for lower office are decided on partisan rather than presidential considerations. Both Joe Biden and Donald Trump are viewed unfavorably by a majority of registered voters. Despite their unpopularity, both are likely to be their respective party’s nominee for the 2024 presidential election in a rematch of 2020 that few want to see again. This has Democrats and Republican political candidates for other offices worried; when voters go to the polls in 2024,…
Holding Trump Accountable Has Not Threatened American Democracy
Did Donald Trump’s indictment increase support for democratic norm violations and political violence? Political commentators have indicated concern that pursuing criminal charges against the former president may inflame antipathy between partisans. Using survey data covering the periods before and after Trump’s indictment, we show no lasting, significant changes in the attitudes of partisans. Any differences in attitudes before and after the indictment quickly dissipated to pre-indictment levels within a few days. Our results have positive implications for the health of our democracy, suggesting politicians can be held accountable for criminal activity without widespread threat of retaliation from supporters.
Introducing the Library of Partisan Animosity
The Polarization Research Lab announces the launch of the Library of Partisan Animosity, an information and learning hub for the most important academic work on partisan animosity–the study of what drives people to like the political party they identify with and dislike the other party, and the consequences of that gap. A breakdown in the dissemination of political science research to practitioners, media, and citizens often occurs due to a lack of a centralized hub, inaccessible academic language, and journal articles living behind expensive paywalls. The Library of Partisan Animosity is an unprecedented effort to bridge this gap by creating…
Tracking America’s Political Pulse
The Polarization Research Lab has launched a new visual dashboard for understanding partisan animosity in America. For the first time, anyone can view accurate and up-to-date polling on the state of polarization and democracy in America just by visiting the free and public PRL website. Using data from the Lab’s weekly tracking survey of 42,000 responses (and counting) since October 2022, the dashboard provides gauges on: Viewers can easily track trends in these measures across states in map form, by total count, or by party in easy-to-read visualizations. With our publicly available data and new dashboard, PRL hopes to empower…
Introducing the Pledge of Civility: An Audited Pledge from Future Elected Officials
The Polarization Research Lab has launched the Pledge of Civility, a new initiative aimed at lowering political hostility in America with an audited pledge from our future elected officials and staffers. The need for such an effort is clear: researchers at the Lab have shown that partisan animosity and affective polarization–the difference between feelings toward the in-party versus the out-party– have increased steadily in the last 30 years, seeped in areas of life outside of politics, and show little signs of change since the Lab began collecting data (see America’s Political Pulse). One of the goals of the Polarization Research Lab is…
PRL First Annual Meeting Convenes Top Scholars on Partisan Animosity
The Polarization Research Lab hosted its First Annual Meeting in collaboration with the Hoover Institution on March 2-3, 2023. Fifty-five attendees enjoyed an instructive two days of research and learning about partisan animosity at the Hoover Institution’s beautiful space in Palo Alto. The meeting brought together academic experts and graduate students across disciplines studying partisan animosity in the US and abroad, practitioners working with communities around the country to temper political polarization, and funders. The goal was to convene these groups in-person to bridge the academic to practitioner divide and share advances in the study of partisan animosity among the…
PRL Announces Launch of Interactive Data Explorer
The Lab is excited to announce a new interactive Data Explorer for visualizing the America’s Political Pulse survey data. One of the Lab’s core goals is providing free and accessible research and information about partisan animosity in America. The launch of the dashboard is a critical contribution to those seeking to understand and address political polarization with scientific data. The Data Explorer allows users to interact with America’s Political Pulse survey data in real time. Users can analyze and visualize data pulled from any of the various survey questions the Lab collects each week. Users can compare and contrast the survey respondents…
Perceived vs. Actual Support for Political Violence
When it comes to many aspects of partisan animosity, Americans have remarkably inaccurate views on the other side, but nowhere is this clearer than with support for political violence. Democrats and Republicans think nearly 60% of the opposing side would support a person charged with politically motivated assault on a member of their party (57.5% for Democrats and 60% for Republicans). The actual numbers are up to 30 times smaller–1.9% of Democrats and 3% of Republicans would actually support the person charged with the crime. When it comes to murder the pattern is the same, but on a smaller scale. Democrats…
Where Do Election Skeptics See Fraud Determining Election Results?
We asked our respondents in a period of three weeks after the election in which states they thought fraud determined the 2022 midterm outcome. Among those who think fraud happened, the average respondents selected five states. The most commonly selected states were a combination of competitive states (Arizona, Pennsylvania, Georgia, etc.) and states that are deeply blue (California, New York, etc.). This suggests that election skeptics see fraud as both a way of swinging close elections and as a manifestation of partisan animosity. Indeed, asking people how fraud on a massive scale could happen in this country, the most common response was blaming…