Skip to main content
main-content
Top

Hint

Swipe to navigate through the articles of this issue

Published in: Political Behavior 3/2015

01-09-2015 | Original Paper

Ideological Social Identity: Psychological Attachment to Ideological In-Groups as a Political Phenomenon and a Behavioral Influence

Author: Christopher J. Devine

Published in: Political Behavior | Issue 3/2015

Login to get access
share
SHARE

Abstract

Motivated by symbolic ideology research and Social Identity Theory (SIT), this article introduces an original measure of ideological social identity (ISI) designed to capture feelings of psychological attachment to an ideological in-group and facilitate analysis of their attitudinal and behavioral effects. Data from a nationally representative sample of survey experimental participants indicates that the ISI scale is empirically distinct from ideological self-placement, the standard measure of symbolic ideology, and it conditions the effects of self-placement on vote choice in actual and hypothetical election scenarios. ISI is also common within the American public, particularly among conservatives, and responsive to environmental stimuli that make ideology salient including electoral competition and “new media” news sources. In addition to its immediate contributions, this research represents a necessary first step toward more fully exploiting the profound theoretical and empirical implications of SIT in studies of ideological identification.

To get access to this content you need the following product:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 69.000 Bücher
  • über 500 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Testen Sie jetzt 15 Tage kostenlos.

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 58.000 Bücher
  • über 300 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Testen Sie jetzt 15 Tage kostenlos.

Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Footnotes
1
The symbolic ideology approach, while influential, is hardly universal among scholars; critics argue that ideological identifications are primarily based upon substantive policy views rather than symbolic evaluations (see, for example, Abramowitz and Saunders 2006). The present analysis is not designed to demonstrate the superiority of either approach, but to refine scholars’ understanding of symbolic ideology with the view that it, as well as operational ideology, has significant theoretical and empirical value.
 
2
This explanation is not contingent upon a belief in the symbolic ideology view, contested by operational ideology advocates, that ideological identification is primarily based upon evaluations of social groups associated with ideological labels (Conover and Feldman 1981; Zschirnt 2011; for a critical analysis, see Abramowitz and Saunders 2006), although that is a view with which I generally agree. Self-categorization, or internalization of a group identity, is sufficient to trigger the social identity processes described above; whether an individual arrives at the point of ideological identification based on symbolic evaluations or policy preferences should not be determinative, only the fact of self-categorization. Social identity and its attendant processes are evident among a wide range of groups, after all, from those based on arbitrary assignment (see, for example, Tajfel et al. 1971) to those seemingly based on social and political convictions, such as feminism (Huddy 1997). Once an individual develops an ideological social identity, however, the ideological in-group becomes a source of psychological and affective attachment motivating political behavior based on group considerations rather, or at least more so, than independent policy judgments. In this sense, the ideological in-group takes on a symbolic function regardless of whether it was adopted for symbolic or substantive reasons.
 
3
Iyengar et al. (2012) adopt a similar approach in their study of partisan affective polarization, explaining: “the more salient the affiliation, the more biased the individual’s beliefs about in-group and out-group members. Salience itself can depend on either dispositional factors… or characteristics of the information environment…” (pp. 407–408). Their analysis indicates that campaign environments have the effect of strengthening partisan identities and confirming partisan stereotypes; in particular, exposure to negative campaign advertisements is a statistically significant and positive predictor of affective polarization. Thus, I find in this research direct support for emphasizing the role of salience in social identity processes, and indirect support for the hypothesized effects of electoral competition and exposure to more ideologically-biased media sources on ideological social identity.
 
4
Knowledge networks (KN) uses random-digit dial and address-based sampling methods to recruit a representative group of Americans into its Knowledge Panel. KN also provides Internet access and hardware, including computers, when needed in order to facilitate representative sampling.
 
5
TESS uses funds from a National Science Foundation grant (SES-0818839) to provide financial support for scholars to conduct online survey experiments among nationally representative participant samples. For more information, see www.​tessexperiments.​org.
 
6
Knowledge networks included a post-stratification weight in the deliverable data to correct for demographic unrepresentativeness. I use this weight in my analysis when appropriate.
 
7
I included this manipulation to test whether social identity levels varied depending on the order in which participants completed ISI versus PSI items. One-way ANOVAs show no such effect. I exclude this manipulation from further analysis.
 
8
This manipulation randomly varied the order in which participants read about party candidates in the general election condition or ideological candidates in the party primary conditions. There is no reason to expect that candidate order influences reported social identity levels. It could, however, affect vote choice and so I include it in the experimental election vote choice model.
 
9
Participants in the latter condition were assigned to party primaries based on reported party affiliation in the KN profile data: Republican (Democratic) identifiers read about a Republican (Democratic) primary and Independents were randomly assigned to either party’s primary.
 
10
Green et al. (2005) use a three-item subset of the IDPG scale, and Weisberg and Hasecke (1999) four items, to study partisan social identity. Both scales prove to be valid and reliable.
 
11
Participants completed one set of PSI measures and one set of ISI measures, corresponding to their partisan and ideological affiliations as previously reported in the KN profile data.
 
12
Cronbach’s Alpha estimates range between 0.02 and 0.48 when pairing the scandal item with either of the other two items, well below acceptable reliability standards.
 
13
As an additional check on the performance of the two-item scale, I used data from a related study of 2008 national party convention delegates that included five social identity measures: the three already described plus two additional measures adapted from the IDPG. The compliment-success scale performs exceptionally well in this analysis. As a measure of liberal, conservative, and Democratic—but not Republican—social identity, this scale performs far better than any other two-item scale combination, and better than expanded scales including all five items or four after excluding the scandal item.
 
14
Control group participants constitute the baseline category in this analysis, since they are coded zero for both of the electoral condition dummy variables.
 
15
Ideological social identity, it should be noted, proves not to be a proxy for partisan social identity. Although the two variables are highly correlated, at 0.619, this correlation is almost identical to that of the traditional ideological and partisan self-placement measures, at 0.603. Moreover, a majority of participants have distinct scores on the ISI and PSI scales, with more than a quarter (27.4 %) exhibiting a stronger ideological than partisan social identity. In fact, participants identifying as conservatives and Republicans score significantly higher in terms of ideological social identity (M = 4.62, SD = 1.20) than they do in terms of partisan social identity (M = 4.40, SD = 1.15), t(350) = 4.19, p = 0.000, while moderate Independents score significantly higher on PSI (M = 4.10, SD = 1.04) than on ISI (M = 3.60, SD = 1.01), t(48) = −3.54, p = 0.001. Also, liberal Democrats have a higher PSI (M = 4.46, SD = 1.22) than ISI, but this difference reaches only marginal levels of statistical significance (M = 4.33, SD = 1.22) t(211) = −1.83, p = 0.070. Thus, while ideological and partisan social identities are empirically related, they do represent distinct constructs and warrant distinct analysis here as well as within the political science literature at large.
 
16
Conservatives and liberals’ mean ISI scores exceed the ISI scale’s neutral point of four at the 0.001 significance level, according to t-tests. Moderates’ mean ISI score does not differ significantly from the neutral point (p = 0.958).
 
17
While ISI levels are lowest among moderates, some of these respondents do exhibit a strong ideological social identity: 26.8 % of moderates score above the scale’s midpoint, and 15.8 % at least slightly agree with the ISI statements. Given the prevalence of ideological moderates in the mass public, including 35.5 % of the survey experiment sample, moderate social identity could be politically significant. For instance, moderate social identity may help to empirically explain responses to partisan and ideological polarization such as third-party voting and ticket-splitting. Future research would be useful in exploring such effects.
 
18
Additional ANOVA tests confirm that ISI does not vary significantly across education levels, when measuring education across its full range or as a median-split dichotomous variable.
 
19
Folded ideological self-placement is excluded from the moderate social identity model, since moderate identifiers inhabit a single position on the scale and this precludes variation.
 
20
Likelihood ratio tests provide an additional indicator of ideological social identity’s empirical contribution. These tests confirm that the addition of the ISI and interaction variables significantly improves model fit, both in the hypothetical Senate vote choice model and in the 2008 presidential vote choice model, at the 0.05 confidence level.
 
21
To provide some initial insight into this relationship, in separate analyses of ANES data I created an approximate measure of ISI by calculating the difference between liberal or conservative respondents’ feeling thermometer ratings of their ideological in-group and out-group, such that a higher relative rating of the in-group indicates a higher level of ISI. It is worth noting that Iyengar et al. (2012) use a parallel strategy to measure partisan affective polarization (see Fig. 3; Table 3), a concept framed explicitly in terms of Social Identity Theory. Logistic regression models predicting vote choice in the 1984–2008 presidential elections yield results remarkably similar to those presented in this analysis and consistent across elections; even when controlling on five operational ideology measures (government spending and services; health care; abortion; defense spending; government aid to African-Americans), as well as relevant political and demographic variables, the marginal effect of ideological self-placement on presidential vote choice is statistically significant but only for respondents with at least a moderately strong (approximated) ISI, and its effects become stronger as ISI become stronger. One or more of the five operational ideology measures is also statistically significant in each vote choice model, attesting to the at least somewhat independent effects of these operational and symbolic ideology measures.
 
Literature
go back to reference Abramowitz, A. I. (2010). The disappearing center: Engaged citizens, polarization, and American democracy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Abramowitz, A. I. (2010). The disappearing center: Engaged citizens, polarization, and American democracy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
go back to reference Abramowitz, A. I., & Saunders, K. L. (1998). Ideological realignment in the U.S. electorate. The Journal of Politics, 60(3), 634–652. CrossRef Abramowitz, A. I., & Saunders, K. L. (1998). Ideological realignment in the U.S. electorate. The Journal of Politics, 60(3), 634–652. CrossRef
go back to reference Abramowitz, A. I., & Saunders, K. L. (2006). Exploring the bases of partisanship in the American electorate: Social identity vs. ideology. Political Research Quarterly, 59(2), 175–187. CrossRef Abramowitz, A. I., & Saunders, K. L. (2006). Exploring the bases of partisanship in the American electorate: Social identity vs. ideology. Political Research Quarterly, 59(2), 175–187. CrossRef
go back to reference Achen, C. A. (1975). Mass political attitudes and the survey response. American Political Science Review, 69(4), 1218–1231. CrossRef Achen, C. A. (1975). Mass political attitudes and the survey response. American Political Science Review, 69(4), 1218–1231. CrossRef
go back to reference Allen, V. L., & Wilder, D. A. (1975). Categorization, belief similarity, and group discrimination. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32(6), 971–977. CrossRef Allen, V. L., & Wilder, D. A. (1975). Categorization, belief similarity, and group discrimination. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32(6), 971–977. CrossRef
go back to reference Althaus, S. L., & Coe, K. (2011). Priming patriots: Social identity processes and the dynamics of public support for war. Public Opinion Quarterly, 75(1), 65–88. CrossRef Althaus, S. L., & Coe, K. (2011). Priming patriots: Social identity processes and the dynamics of public support for war. Public Opinion Quarterly, 75(1), 65–88. CrossRef
go back to reference Baum, L. (2006). Judges and their audiences: A perspective on judicial behavior. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Baum, L. (2006). Judges and their audiences: A perspective on judicial behavior. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
go back to reference Billig, M., & Tajfel, H. (1973). Social categorization and similarity in inter-group behavior. European Journal of Social Psychology, 3(1), 27–52. CrossRef Billig, M., & Tajfel, H. (1973). Social categorization and similarity in inter-group behavior. European Journal of Social Psychology, 3(1), 27–52. CrossRef
go back to reference Brambor, T., Clark, W. R., & Golder, M. (2006). Understanding interaction models: Improving empirical analysis. Political Analysis, 14(1), 63–82. CrossRef Brambor, T., Clark, W. R., & Golder, M. (2006). Understanding interaction models: Improving empirical analysis. Political Analysis, 14(1), 63–82. CrossRef
go back to reference Braumoeller, B. F. (2004). Hypothesis testing and multiplicative interaction terms. International Organization, 58(4), 807–820. CrossRef Braumoeller, B. F. (2004). Hypothesis testing and multiplicative interaction terms. International Organization, 58(4), 807–820. CrossRef
go back to reference Brewer, M. B. (1991). The social self: On being the same and being different. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17(5), 475–482. CrossRef Brewer, M. B. (1991). The social self: On being the same and being different. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17(5), 475–482. CrossRef
go back to reference Brewer, M. B. (2002). The psychology of prejudice: Ingroup love and outgroup hate? Journal of Social Issues, 55(3), 429–444. CrossRef Brewer, M. B. (2002). The psychology of prejudice: Ingroup love and outgroup hate? Journal of Social Issues, 55(3), 429–444. CrossRef
go back to reference Brewer, M. B., & Silver, M. (1978). Ingroup bias as a function of task characteristics. European Journal of Social Psychology, 8(3), 393–400. CrossRef Brewer, M. B., & Silver, M. (1978). Ingroup bias as a function of task characteristics. European Journal of Social Psychology, 8(3), 393–400. CrossRef
go back to reference Brewer, M. B., & Silver, M. D. (2000). Group distinctiveness, social identity, and collective mobilization. In S. Stryker, T. J. Owens, & R. W. White (Eds.), Self, identity, and social movement. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota. Brewer, M. B., & Silver, M. D. (2000). Group distinctiveness, social identity, and collective mobilization. In S. Stryker, T. J. Owens, & R. W. White (Eds.), Self, identity, and social movement. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.
go back to reference Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, W. E., & Stokes, D. E. (1960). The American voter. New York: Wiley. Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, W. E., & Stokes, D. E. (1960). The American voter. New York: Wiley.
go back to reference Carmines, E. G., & Berkman, M. (1994). Ethos, ideology, and partisanship: Exploring the paradox of conservative Democrats. Political Behavior, 16(2), 203–218. CrossRef Carmines, E. G., & Berkman, M. (1994). Ethos, ideology, and partisanship: Exploring the paradox of conservative Democrats. Political Behavior, 16(2), 203–218. CrossRef
go back to reference Conover, P. J., & Feldman, S. (1981). The origins and meaning of liberal and conservative self-identifications. American Journal of Political Science, 25(4), 617–645. CrossRef Conover, P. J., & Feldman, S. (1981). The origins and meaning of liberal and conservative self-identifications. American Journal of Political Science, 25(4), 617–645. CrossRef
go back to reference Converse, P. E. (1964). The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In D. E. Apter (Ed.), Ideology and discontent. New York: Free Press of Glencoe. Converse, P. E. (1964). The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In D. E. Apter (Ed.), Ideology and discontent. New York: Free Press of Glencoe.
go back to reference Doise, W., & Sinclair, A. (1973). The categorization process in intergroup relations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 3(2), 145–157. CrossRef Doise, W., & Sinclair, A. (1973). The categorization process in intergroup relations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 3(2), 145–157. CrossRef
go back to reference Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. New York: Harper and Row. Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. New York: Harper and Row.
go back to reference Ellis, C., & Stimson, J. A. (2012). Ideology in America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef Ellis, C., & Stimson, J. A. (2012). Ideology in America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef
go back to reference Feldman, S. (2003). Values, ideology, and the structure of political attitudes. In D. O. Sears, L. Huddy, & R. Jervis (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of political psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Feldman, S. (2003). Values, ideology, and the structure of political attitudes. In D. O. Sears, L. Huddy, & R. Jervis (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of political psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
go back to reference Fiorina, M. P., & Abrams, S. J. (2008). Political polarization in the American public. Annual Review of Political Science, 11(1), 563–588. CrossRef Fiorina, M. P., & Abrams, S. J. (2008). Political polarization in the American public. Annual Review of Political Science, 11(1), 563–588. CrossRef
go back to reference Fowler, J. H., & Kam, C. D. (2007). Beyond the self: Social identity, altruism, and political participation. The Journal of Politics, 69(3), 813–827. CrossRef Fowler, J. H., & Kam, C. D. (2007). Beyond the self: Social identity, altruism, and political participation. The Journal of Politics, 69(3), 813–827. CrossRef
go back to reference Free, L. A., & Cantril, H. (1967). The political beliefs of Americans. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. Free, L. A., & Cantril, H. (1967). The political beliefs of Americans. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
go back to reference Gaertner, S. L., Dovidio, J. F., Anastasio, P. A., Bachman, B. A., & Rust, M. C. (1993). The common in-group identity model: Recategorization and the reduction of inter-group bias. European Review of Social Psychology, 4(1), 1–26. Gaertner, S. L., Dovidio, J. F., Anastasio, P. A., Bachman, B. A., & Rust, M. C. (1993). The common in-group identity model: Recategorization and the reduction of inter-group bias. European Review of Social Psychology, 4(1), 1–26.
go back to reference Gibson, J. L., & Gouws, A. (2000). Social identities and political intolerance: Linkages within the South African mass public. American Journal of Political Science, 44(2), 278–292. CrossRef Gibson, J. L., & Gouws, A. (2000). Social identities and political intolerance: Linkages within the South African mass public. American Journal of Political Science, 44(2), 278–292. CrossRef
go back to reference Green, D. P., Palmquist, B., & Schickler, E. (2005). Partisan hearts and minds: Political parties and the social identities of voters. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Green, D. P., Palmquist, B., & Schickler, E. (2005). Partisan hearts and minds: Political parties and the social identities of voters. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
go back to reference Greene, S. (1999). Understanding party identification: A social identity approach. Political Psychology, 20(2), 393–403. CrossRef Greene, S. (1999). Understanding party identification: A social identity approach. Political Psychology, 20(2), 393–403. CrossRef
go back to reference Greene, S. (2000). The psychological sources of partisan-leaning independence. American Politics Quarterly, 28(4), 511–537. CrossRef Greene, S. (2000). The psychological sources of partisan-leaning independence. American Politics Quarterly, 28(4), 511–537. CrossRef
go back to reference Hetherington, M. J., & Weiler, J. (2009). Authoritarianism and polarization in American politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef Hetherington, M. J., & Weiler, J. (2009). Authoritarianism and polarization in American politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef
go back to reference Huddy, L. (1997). Feminists and feminism in the news. In P. Norris (Ed.), Women, the media, and politics. New York: Oxford University Press. Huddy, L. (1997). Feminists and feminism in the news. In P. Norris (Ed.), Women, the media, and politics. New York: Oxford University Press.
go back to reference Huddy, L., & Khatib, N. (2007). American patriotism, national identity, and political involvement. American Journal of Political Science, 51(1), 63–77. CrossRef Huddy, L., & Khatib, N. (2007). American patriotism, national identity, and political involvement. American Journal of Political Science, 51(1), 63–77. CrossRef
go back to reference Iyengar, S., Sood, G., & Lelkes, Y. (2012). Affect, not ideology: A social identity perspective on polarization. Public Opinion Quarterly, 76(3), 405–431. CrossRef Iyengar, S., Sood, G., & Lelkes, Y. (2012). Affect, not ideology: A social identity perspective on polarization. Public Opinion Quarterly, 76(3), 405–431. CrossRef
go back to reference Jacoby, W. G. (1991). Ideological identification and issue attitudes. American Journal of Political Science, 35(1), 178–205. CrossRef Jacoby, W. G. (1991). Ideological identification and issue attitudes. American Journal of Political Science, 35(1), 178–205. CrossRef
go back to reference Jost, J. T. (2006). The end of the end of ideology. American Psychologist, 61(7), 651–670. CrossRef Jost, J. T. (2006). The end of the end of ideology. American Psychologist, 61(7), 651–670. CrossRef
go back to reference Kinder, D. R. (1983). Diversity and complexity in American public opinion. In A. W. Finifter (Ed.), Political science: The state of the discipline. Washington, DC: American Political Science Association. Kinder, D. R. (1983). Diversity and complexity in American public opinion. In A. W. Finifter (Ed.), Political science: The state of the discipline. Washington, DC: American Political Science Association.
go back to reference Knight, K. (1985). Ideology in the 1980 election: Ideological sophistication does matter. The Journal of Politics, 47(3), 828–853. CrossRef Knight, K. (1985). Ideology in the 1980 election: Ideological sophistication does matter. The Journal of Politics, 47(3), 828–853. CrossRef
go back to reference Levendusky, M. (2009). The partisan sort: How liberals became Democrats and conservatives became Republicans. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Levendusky, M. (2009). The partisan sort: How liberals became Democrats and conservatives became Republicans. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
go back to reference Levitin, T. E., & Miller, W. E. (1979). Ideological interpretations of presidential elections. The American Political Science Review, 73(3), 751–771. CrossRef Levitin, T. E., & Miller, W. E. (1979). Ideological interpretations of presidential elections. The American Political Science Review, 73(3), 751–771. CrossRef
go back to reference Lewis-Beck, M. S., Jacoby, W. G., Norpoth, H., & Weisberg, H. F. (2008). The American voter revisited. Ann Arbor: The Michigan University Press. Lewis-Beck, M. S., Jacoby, W. G., Norpoth, H., & Weisberg, H. F. (2008). The American voter revisited. Ann Arbor: The Michigan University Press.
go back to reference Luttbeg, N. R., & Gant, M. M. (1985). The failure of liberal-conservative ideology as a cognitive structure. Public Opinion Quarterly, 49(1), 80–93. CrossRef Luttbeg, N. R., & Gant, M. M. (1985). The failure of liberal-conservative ideology as a cognitive structure. Public Opinion Quarterly, 49(1), 80–93. CrossRef
go back to reference Mael, F., & Tetrick, L. (1992). Identifying organizational identification. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52(4), 813–824. CrossRef Mael, F., & Tetrick, L. (1992). Identifying organizational identification. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52(4), 813–824. CrossRef
go back to reference Malka, A., & Lelkes, Y. (2010). More than ideology: Conservative-liberal identity receptivity to political cues. Social Justice Research, 23(2), 156–188. CrossRef Malka, A., & Lelkes, Y. (2010). More than ideology: Conservative-liberal identity receptivity to political cues. Social Justice Research, 23(2), 156–188. CrossRef
go back to reference Mullen, B., Brown, R. J., & Smith, C. (1992). Ingroup bias as a function of salience, relevance, and status: An integration. European Journal of Social Psychology, 22(2), 103–122. CrossRef Mullen, B., Brown, R. J., & Smith, C. (1992). Ingroup bias as a function of salience, relevance, and status: An integration. European Journal of Social Psychology, 22(2), 103–122. CrossRef
go back to reference Mummendey, A., & Wenzel, M. (1999). Social discrimination and tolerance in intergroup relations: Reactions to intergroup difference. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(2), 158–174. CrossRef Mummendey, A., & Wenzel, M. (1999). Social discrimination and tolerance in intergroup relations: Reactions to intergroup difference. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(2), 158–174. CrossRef
go back to reference Nie, N., Verba, S., & Petrocik, J. R. (1976). The changing American voter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Nie, N., Verba, S., & Petrocik, J. R. (1976). The changing American voter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
go back to reference Popp, E., & Rudolph, T. J. (2011). A tale of two ideologies: Explaining public support for economic interventions. The Journal of Politics, 73(3), 808–820. CrossRef Popp, E., & Rudolph, T. J. (2011). A tale of two ideologies: Explaining public support for economic interventions. The Journal of Politics, 73(3), 808–820. CrossRef
go back to reference Roccas, S., & Brewer, M. B. (2002). Social identity complexity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6(2), 88–106. CrossRef Roccas, S., & Brewer, M. B. (2002). Social identity complexity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6(2), 88–106. CrossRef
go back to reference Tajfel, H. (1978). Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations. London: Academic Press. Tajfel, H. (1978). Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations. London: Academic Press.
go back to reference Tajfel, H., Flament, C., Billig, M. G., & Bundy, R. P. (1971). Social categorization and intergroup behavior. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1(2), 149–178. CrossRef Tajfel, H., Flament, C., Billig, M. G., & Bundy, R. P. (1971). Social categorization and intergroup behavior. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1(2), 149–178. CrossRef
go back to reference Theiss-Morse, E. (2009). Who counts as an American? The boundaries of national identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef Theiss-Morse, E. (2009). Who counts as an American? The boundaries of national identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef
go back to reference Turner, J. C. (1985). Social categorization and the self-concept: A social cognitive theory of group behavior. In E. J. Lawler (Ed.), Advances in group processes (Vol. 2). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Turner, J. C. (1985). Social categorization and the self-concept: A social cognitive theory of group behavior. In E. J. Lawler (Ed.), Advances in group processes (Vol. 2). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
go back to reference Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A social categorization theory. Oxford: Blackwell. Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A social categorization theory. Oxford: Blackwell.
go back to reference Weisberg, H. F., & Hasecke, E. B. (1999). The social identity underpinnings of partisan strength. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL. Weisberg, H. F., & Hasecke, E. B. (1999). The social identity underpinnings of partisan strength. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL.
go back to reference Zaller, J. R. (1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef Zaller, J. R. (1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef
go back to reference Zschirnt, S. (2011). The origins and meaning of liberal/conservative self-identification revisited. Political Behavior, 33(4), 685–701. CrossRef Zschirnt, S. (2011). The origins and meaning of liberal/conservative self-identification revisited. Political Behavior, 33(4), 685–701. CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Ideological Social Identity: Psychological Attachment to Ideological In-Groups as a Political Phenomenon and a Behavioral Influence
Author
Christopher J. Devine
Publication date
01-09-2015
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Political Behavior / Issue 3/2015
Print ISSN: 0190-9320
Electronic ISSN: 1573-6687
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-014-9280-6

Other articles of this Issue 3/2015

Political Behavior 3/2015 Go to the issue

Premium Partner