Miller's Investigation of Electoral Competition and Partisan Affective Polarisation

Creator: Dani Maiz | Credit: Dani Maiz on facebook.com

Miller's Research Question and Conclusion to the Polarisation Issue

The research presented in this article focuses on estimating the causal effect of elections on partisan affective polarisation using survey data from Spain. The researchers intend to "address whether electoral campaigns and elections more generally, have a larger effect on partisan polarisation than on other sources of polarisation (e.g. other social cleavages), in particular territorial identification. (p.27)." Therefore, through a combination of methodological strategies, including a repeated measures design and a difference-in-differences analysis, the study examines changes within individuals over time to control for observable and unobservable factors. The main conclusion drawn from the analysis is that elections consistently increase partisan affective polarisation, with an approximate 3% increase observed. This effect is primarily driven by an alignment of voters around their political group rather than increasing hostility towards opposing groups. The study also suggests a potential link between polarisation of the electorate and electoral success, particularly among moderate and left-leaning voters. In addition, the research highlights the impact of Spain's multi-party system and its frequent elections on exacerbating polarisation within society, emphasizing the need for reforms to promote stable governance and mitigate escalating tensions in an increasingly polarised environment.

Newspaper Article: How Much Does How Much We Hate Each Other Matter? (The New York Times)

The discourse surrounding affective polarisation in American politics parallels the examination of partisan affective polarisation in Spain, as discussed in Miller's research. While the Spanish study delves into the causal effects of elections on partisan polarisation within a specific context, the New York Times article scrutinises the impact of affective polarisation on democratic norms and accountability in the United States. As a result, there is a highlight of the complexities of political polarisation, with Miller's investigation suggesting a link between electoral success and polarisation, and the American discourse exploring the relationship between polarisation and support for anti-democratic measures. Despite differences in methodology and context, they agree that understanding the drivers and consequences of polarisation is crucial for addressing challenges within democratic systems in the Western World.

Opinion | How Much Does How Much We Hate Each Other Matter? (Published 2021)A lot hinges on the answer.

Questions

Could you elaborate on the rationale behind using a differences-in-differences analysis to estimate the effect of elections on partisan affective polarisation?
Were any alternative methodologies considered during the design phase of your research, and if so, what factors influenced your decision to adopt the chosen approach?

Page updated

Google Sites

Report abuse