Partisan joiners: Associational membership and political polarization in the United States (1974-2004)

Delia Baldassarri

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    Associational life may foster political integration or amplify division, depending on how individuals partition themselves into groups and whether their multiple affiliations embed them into concentric or cross-cutting social circles. Starting from this premise, I relate trends in associational membership to political partisanship, and ask if there is any evidence of increased political polarization in the associative patterns of Americans. Methods. Using GSS data (1974-2004) on affiliations to 16 types of groups, I plot trends and run multilevel models to examine changes over time in the partisan allegiances of group members and patterns of overlapping memberships. Results. The often-lamented decline in group membership affects primarily the category of single-group members and is limited to a few types of groups. The density of the network of overlapping memberships has remained stable over time and there are no real changes in the patterns of shared memberships between group types, nor do Republicans and Democrats differ in their patterns of preferential affiliation. Although political partisanship does not drive patterns of group affiliation, group members, especially those affiliated with multiple groups, are more radical in their partisan identification than nonmembers, and most types of groups have become politically more heterogeneous over time. Conclusion. The puzzling finding that group types are not becoming more partisan, while group members are, leads to the hypothesis (to be tested in future research) that civil society polarization is occurring at the level of actual groups, and not group types.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)631-655
    Number of pages25
    JournalSocial Science Quarterly
    Volume92
    Issue number3
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Sep 2011

    Fingerprint

    group membership
    polarization
    Types of Groups
    Group
    political integration
    trend
    civil society
    evidence
    time

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Social Sciences(all)

    Cite this

    Partisan joiners : Associational membership and political polarization in the United States (1974-2004). / Baldassarri, Delia.

    In: Social Science Quarterly, Vol. 92, No. 3, 09.2011, p. 631-655.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    @article{0c5e56e0bc6e41c5968a6f0e781404a6,
    title = "Partisan joiners: Associational membership and political polarization in the United States (1974-2004)",
    abstract = "Associational life may foster political integration or amplify division, depending on how individuals partition themselves into groups and whether their multiple affiliations embed them into concentric or cross-cutting social circles. Starting from this premise, I relate trends in associational membership to political partisanship, and ask if there is any evidence of increased political polarization in the associative patterns of Americans. Methods. Using GSS data (1974-2004) on affiliations to 16 types of groups, I plot trends and run multilevel models to examine changes over time in the partisan allegiances of group members and patterns of overlapping memberships. Results. The often-lamented decline in group membership affects primarily the category of single-group members and is limited to a few types of groups. The density of the network of overlapping memberships has remained stable over time and there are no real changes in the patterns of shared memberships between group types, nor do Republicans and Democrats differ in their patterns of preferential affiliation. Although political partisanship does not drive patterns of group affiliation, group members, especially those affiliated with multiple groups, are more radical in their partisan identification than nonmembers, and most types of groups have become politically more heterogeneous over time. Conclusion. The puzzling finding that group types are not becoming more partisan, while group members are, leads to the hypothesis (to be tested in future research) that civil society polarization is occurring at the level of actual groups, and not group types.",
    author = "Delia Baldassarri",
    year = "2011",
    month = "9",
    doi = "10.1111/j.1540-6237.2011.00785.x",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "92",
    pages = "631--655",
    journal = "Social Science Quarterly",
    issn = "0038-4941",
    publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
    number = "3",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Partisan joiners

    T2 - Associational membership and political polarization in the United States (1974-2004)

    AU - Baldassarri, Delia

    PY - 2011/9

    Y1 - 2011/9

    N2 - Associational life may foster political integration or amplify division, depending on how individuals partition themselves into groups and whether their multiple affiliations embed them into concentric or cross-cutting social circles. Starting from this premise, I relate trends in associational membership to political partisanship, and ask if there is any evidence of increased political polarization in the associative patterns of Americans. Methods. Using GSS data (1974-2004) on affiliations to 16 types of groups, I plot trends and run multilevel models to examine changes over time in the partisan allegiances of group members and patterns of overlapping memberships. Results. The often-lamented decline in group membership affects primarily the category of single-group members and is limited to a few types of groups. The density of the network of overlapping memberships has remained stable over time and there are no real changes in the patterns of shared memberships between group types, nor do Republicans and Democrats differ in their patterns of preferential affiliation. Although political partisanship does not drive patterns of group affiliation, group members, especially those affiliated with multiple groups, are more radical in their partisan identification than nonmembers, and most types of groups have become politically more heterogeneous over time. Conclusion. The puzzling finding that group types are not becoming more partisan, while group members are, leads to the hypothesis (to be tested in future research) that civil society polarization is occurring at the level of actual groups, and not group types.

    AB - Associational life may foster political integration or amplify division, depending on how individuals partition themselves into groups and whether their multiple affiliations embed them into concentric or cross-cutting social circles. Starting from this premise, I relate trends in associational membership to political partisanship, and ask if there is any evidence of increased political polarization in the associative patterns of Americans. Methods. Using GSS data (1974-2004) on affiliations to 16 types of groups, I plot trends and run multilevel models to examine changes over time in the partisan allegiances of group members and patterns of overlapping memberships. Results. The often-lamented decline in group membership affects primarily the category of single-group members and is limited to a few types of groups. The density of the network of overlapping memberships has remained stable over time and there are no real changes in the patterns of shared memberships between group types, nor do Republicans and Democrats differ in their patterns of preferential affiliation. Although political partisanship does not drive patterns of group affiliation, group members, especially those affiliated with multiple groups, are more radical in their partisan identification than nonmembers, and most types of groups have become politically more heterogeneous over time. Conclusion. The puzzling finding that group types are not becoming more partisan, while group members are, leads to the hypothesis (to be tested in future research) that civil society polarization is occurring at the level of actual groups, and not group types.

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80051589483&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80051589483&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1111/j.1540-6237.2011.00785.x

    DO - 10.1111/j.1540-6237.2011.00785.x

    M3 - Article

    AN - SCOPUS:80051589483

    VL - 92

    SP - 631

    EP - 655

    JO - Social Science Quarterly

    JF - Social Science Quarterly

    SN - 0038-4941

    IS - 3

    ER -