MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1093/poq/nfag010

Медицинская библиотека · Public opinion quarterly · 2026

Mind the Gap: Partisan Bias in Justifying Political Violence in the United States.

Berntzen Lars Erik, Cappelen Cornelius, Mason Lilliana, Midtbø Tor

СтатьяПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

Political polarization in America has intensified beyond mere disagreement to what scholars characterize as sectarianism-a condition where partisan identity fundamentally shapes moral judgments. A key marker of sectarianism is asymmetric moral standards for violence, where aggression against political opponents is considered more justified than identical violence targeting one's own group. Using a survey experiment featuring a realistic political rally scenario, we find compelling evidence in support of such sectarianism: partisan bias in the US extends to evaluations of political violence. By manipulating the partisan affiliations of perpetrators and targets, as well as provocation severity, we find that both Democrats and Republicans exhibit substantial and symmetrical partisan bias. This double standard is particularly pronounced among strong partisans, who are nearly three times more likely to justify violence against the opposition than violence targeting their own party. These results extend sectarianism theory beyond policy preferences to physical violence, suggesting that partisan identity now functions as a powerful perceptual filter that can legitimize political aggression when directed at opponents.

Для цитирования: Berntzen Lars Erik, Cappelen Cornelius, Mason Lilliana, Midtbø Tor. Mind the Gap: Partisan Bias in Justifying Political Violence in the United States.. Public opinion quarterly. 2026. DOI: 10.1093/poq/nfag010.
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.