2012
DOI: 10.1017/s1049096512000509
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Incivility and Standing Firm: A Second Layer of Partisan Division

Abstract: Political observers have detected a noticeable uptick in American political incivility in recent years, culminating with several moderate senators recently citing the rise of hard-core partisanship as the reason for their retirement. Supporting these accusations of unprecedented incivility with empirical evidence can be difficult, as notions of what constitutes appropriate, civil behavior are subjective and can vary across the political context of different eras. Was it more uncivil, for example, for William J… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

1
8
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
1
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Are the latest political leaders more antagonistic and rude than recent predecessors? Concern over an apparent increase in incivility in recent years has been reported for American politics (Wolf, Strachan, & Shea, 2012). Sobieraj and Berry (2011) analyzed political commentary on American TV, radio, blogs, and in newspaper columns.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Are the latest political leaders more antagonistic and rude than recent predecessors? Concern over an apparent increase in incivility in recent years has been reported for American politics (Wolf, Strachan, & Shea, 2012). Sobieraj and Berry (2011) analyzed political commentary on American TV, radio, blogs, and in newspaper columns.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, because Democrats are more likely than Republicans to prioritize humanitarian and egalitarian policy goals over individualistic and/or hierarchy-preserving ones (e.g., Barker and Tinnick 2006, Mcadams et al, 2008; Piurko et al, 2011; Haidt, 2012, Barker and Marietta, 2020), we suggest that such asymmetrical partisan value dynamics help explain the well-established tendency of Democrats to support political compromise more readily than Republicans do (Hibbing et al, 2009; Wolf et al, 2012; Grossmann & Hopkins, 2016; Ryan, 2017; Glaser & Berry, 2018; Mason, 2018; Wolak, 2020; but see Davis, 2019). 6…”
mentioning
confidence: 80%
“…1 Such public resistance incentivizes obstinacy on the part of those lawmakers (e.g., Anderson et al, 2020; Barker & Carman, 2012; Kamarck & Wallner, 2018). 2 Thus, as a burgeoning literature reflects, it is important to understand the variance in public attitudes toward political compromise (e.g., Hibbing et al, 2009; Mackuen et al, 2010; Harbridge & Malhotra, 2011; Wolf et al, 2012; Harbridge et al, 2014; Haas, 2016; Bauer, Harbridge and Krupnikov 2017; Kirkland & Harden, 2018; Wolak, 2020). 3…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…How such issues and actions ultimately influence political life has received very limited attention. As a consequence, scholars are unsure of the dividing line between civil and uncivil communications and promotions, making it difficult to determine if information packaged in negative contexts is appropriate or whether it always constitutes a form of impoliteness that undermines the democratic political process (Wolf, Strachan, and Shea 2012). The larger societal goal may be to allow for disagreement without jeopardizing ongoing dialogue or social harmony (Shea and Sproveri 2012).…”
Section: Negative Political Advertisingmentioning
confidence: 99%