The Political Impact of Affective Polarization: How Partisan Animus Shapes COVID-19 Attitudes James N. Druckman**, Samara Klar***, Yanna Krupnikov****, Matthew Levendusky*****, and John Barry Ryan****** July 1, 2020 Abstract Affective polarization is a defining feature of 21st century American politics—partisans harbor considerable dislike and distrust of those from the other party. Does this animus have consequences for citizens’ opinions? Such effects would highlight not only the consequences of polarization, but also shed new light onto how citizens form preferences more generally. Normally, this question is intractable, but the outbreak of the novel coronavirus allows us to answer it. We find that affective polarization powerfully shapes citizens’ attitudes about the pandemic, as well as the actions they have taken in response to it. However, these effects are conditional on the local severity of the outbreak, as the effects decline in areas with high caseloads—threat vitiates partisan reasoning. Our results clarify that closing the divide on important issues requires not just policy discourse but also attempts to reduce inter-partisan hostility. ****Payson S. Wild Professor of Political Science and Faculty Fellow in the Institute for Policy Research at Northwestern University,
[email protected]. ******Associate Professor, School of Government and Public Policy, University of Arizona,
[email protected] . ******** Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, Stony Brook University,
[email protected]. ********** Professor of Political Science (and, by courtesy, in the Annenberg School for Communication), and Stephen and Mary Baran Chair in the Institutions of Democracy at the Annenberg Public Policy Center, University of Pennsylvania,
[email protected]. ************Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, Stony Brook University,
[email protected].