Outgroup hostility in politics mirrors the levels of hostility observed in other achieved-identity domains (with Isabel Rodríguez and Tom Lane)
Political identity has become a dominant social cleavage in many democracies, often eclipsing divisions rooted in race, religion, or nationality. While prior research has emphasized the macro-level consequences of partyism, we investigate the micro-level mechanisms that sustain it. Across laboratory (N = 168, 155) and large-scale survey experiments (N = 3,015), we find that norms against intergroup discrimination are weaker in identity domains perceived as "achieved" (e.g., politics, football, education) compared to those viewed as "ascribed" (e.g., gender, religion, nationality). Political and football identities, in particular, generate similar levels of normative permissiveness toward ingroup bias. These findings challenge the idea that partisanship is uniquely toxic and instead point to its classification as a chosen identity-more susceptible to blame and norm violations. Our results offer a new framework for understanding the psychology of political polarization and suggest that interventions should reflect the distinct normative landscape of achieved versus ascribed identities.
Who Are the Two Spains?Attitudes and Lifestyle Cleavages in Contemporary Spain
This article revisits the idea of “the two Spains” through the lens of lifestyle-based social sorting. Drawing on an original survey of 3,015 respondents conducted in June 2024, it examines how political identities are embedded in cultural practices. Using statistical techniques for dimension reduction and clustering, the study identifies two dominant lifestyle formations—Progressives and Conservatives—that mirror Spain’s main ideological cleavage. These groups diverge not only in moral and political orientations, but also in cultural engagement, leisure activities, mobility, and attitudes toward minorities, underscoring the social embeddedness of political conflict. A secondary analysis further disaggregates this divide into four clusters—Progs, Tepids, Moderates, and Disengaged—which capture heterogeneity in cultural participation, political alignment, and daily practices. Extending lifestyle polarization research into a multiparty European context, the article contributes to political and cultural sociology by showing that divisions in Spain are increasingly lived through routine behaviors and cultural tastes.
Partisan Primacy in Spain: Mapping Affective Polarization Across Social Identity Divides (with Isabel Rodríguez)
Research on affective polarization highlights politics as a “mega-identity” that structures intergroup hostility, yet most evidence comes from the United States. We extend this agenda to Spain through an original online survey (N = 3,000) conducted in June 2024 with a stratified national sample. Respondents evaluated 26 political and social groups using 0–100 feeling thermometers, enabling direct comparisons across domains such as religion, gender roles, ecology, ethnicity, sexual orientation, education, region, and sports. Consistent with findings in the U.S. and Northern Europe, we show that politics generates the most extreme intergroup affect: average ratings of co-partisans exceed 80, whereas disliked parties fall below 10. Other identities elicit milder, though still systematic, gaps. For example, religious, ecological, and gender role divides produce moderate levels of exogroup coldness, while divisions by region, education, and sexual orientation are comparatively muted. These results underscore the primacy of partisan identity in structuring affective evaluations, while situating Spain within broader debates on the generalizability of polarization beyond the U.S. Our study contributes to the comparative literature by providing new evidence from Southern Europe, highlighting how partisan conflict amplifies or subsumes other identity-based divides in contemporary democracies.