Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39411088›Full record

ArticlePNAS nexus2024

Affective polarization is uniformly distributed across American States.

Derek E Holliday, Yphtach Lelkes, Sean J Westwood

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PNAS nexus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Derek E HollidayDepartment of Political Science, Stanford University, 616 Jane Stanford Way, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0064-4979
Yphtach LelkesAnnenberg School of Communication, University of Pennsylvania, 3620 Walnut St., Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1805-056X
Sean J WestwoodDepartment of Government, Dartmouth College, 3 Tuck Mall, Hanover, NH 03755, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2383-8047

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

US partisans view each other with increasing negativity. While many attribute the growth of such affective polarization to nationally cross-cutting forces, such as ideological partisan sorting or access to partisan media, others emphasize the effects of contextual and institutional forces. For the first time, we introduce and explore data sufficiently granular to fully map the extent of partisan animosity across the US states. With a massive, nationally representative survey we find that, counter to expectations, variation in affective polarization across states is relatively small, and is instead largely a function of individual-level attitudinal (but not demographic) characteristics. While elections pit regions of the country against others, our results suggest affective polarization is a national, not regional, problem, requiring national interventions.

Indexed as

affective polarizationpartisanshippolitical geography

Identifiers

PMID39411088
PMCPMC11475403

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.