麻豆传媒

In an election year, there鈥檚 no escaping the intense polarisation that has soured US political debate in recent years. Look beyond the politicians and the media circus surrounding them, though, and it鈥檚 a different story. People鈥檚 views on a series of touchstone issues do not follow party affiliation as strongly as is popularly assumed. What鈥檚 more, little has changed since the early 1970s, according to a new study.

No one doubts that elected representatives in Washington DC have become more polarised. By in the US Congress, of the University of Georgia in Athens and of New York University have shown that lawmakers have divided .

Political scientists are split, though, on whether this growing chasm reflects a hardening of partisan attitudes among the electorate. To investigate further, of the University of Florida in Gainesville, working with of the University of Colorado at Boulder and his student Jake Westfall, analysed results from the , in which voters have been surveyed in each presidential election year.

The researchers looked at people鈥檚 views on 10 divisive topics, including government provision of health insurance and spending on defence. They also looked at the same people鈥檚 estimates of typical Democrats鈥� and Republicans鈥� views on the same issues. The actual degree of polarisation according to party affiliation was fairly modest, but people thought it was much wider 鈥� especially those who described themselves as 鈥渟trong鈥� Republicans or Democrats. These patterns have been consistent since 1970.

鈥淧olarisation is not as great as we think it is,鈥� says Chambers. 鈥淎nd it hasn鈥檛 changed.鈥�

False assumptions

Chambers and his colleagues hope that exposing this misperception will help people make more informed decisions about individual candidates, rather than simply voting along party lines to keep the 鈥渆nemy鈥� at bay.

鈥淧eople are acting on false assumptions,鈥� says Van Boven. 鈥淲hen people feel threatened, they become very defensive.鈥�

The researchers also related people鈥檚 perceptions of polarisation to whether they said they voted or got involved in political campaigns. Even after controlling for strength of party affiliation and other factors, people who perceived the US public to be more polarised were more likely to be politically active.

This suggests that close electoral races are often decided by voters who are driven by false fears about others鈥� views 鈥� and may mean that the party which most effectively stokes these fears among its supporters is likely to carry the day.

The study conclusions will be presented at this week鈥檚 in San Diego, California.