Abstract
Recent research has shown how norms shape political and economic decision-making. Much of this work assumes that a single norm influences the behavior of all people, but in fact, many situations are characterized by the existence of competing normative viewpoints. We apply a method for measuring belief in the simultaneous existence of multiple norms. Such multiplicity arises naturally when norms are associated with distinctive groups, and thus political polarization can be characterized, in part, as a product of diverging norms between groups. We thus assess the validity of our measurement technique by testing whether it can recover polarization on seven salient political issues on which US Democrats and Republicans tend to hold different views. We then compare the norms elicited by our method to the norms of Democrats and Republicans elicited in a separate sample using an established and validated—but methodologically less rich—measurement approach. Our study uncovers a wide range of co-existing views between and within political groups. Partisans understand their group’s norms and hold personal views that align with them. They can also recognize the diversity and polarization in US public opinion by identifying norms specific to political parties and acknowledging the variety of views within their own parties, which may indicate internal divisions. This research underscores the importance of nuanced approaches to political norms that go beyond party lines. By acknowledging a plurality of views, we can encourage productive discussions and bridge ideological divides.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
; Dimant, Eugen 2
; Kimbrough, Erik O 3
; Vostroknutov, Alexander 4 1 Molecular Mind Laboratory, IMT School for Advanced Studies Lucca , Lucca 55100 , Italy
2 Center for Social Norms and Behavioral Dynamics, University of Pennsylvania , Philadelphia, PA 19104 , USA
3 Smith Institute for Political Economy and Philosophy, Chapman University , Orange, CA 92866 , USA
4 Department of Microeconomics and Public Economics, Maastricht University , Maastricht 6211 LM , The Netherlands





