No evidence of a general increase in the public’s affective polarization in 2014-2017; despite a campaign with elevated elite hostility & rampant discord after the 2016 election, the limits on partisan prejudice identified in prior research remain in place

Are There Still Limits on Partisan Prejudice? Sean J. Westwood, Erik Peterson and Yphtach Lelkes. Dartmouth College & University of Pennsylvania. https://www.dartmouth.edu/~seanjwestwood/papers/stillLimits.pdf

Abstract: Partisan  affective  polarization  is  believed,  by  some,  to  result  from  hostility  in  elite political discourse. We explore this account by replicating a 2014 study that examines partisan prejudice. This extensive replication offers no evidence of a general increase in the public’s affective polarization between 2014 and 2017. Divides in feeling thermometer ratings of the two political parties remained stable and there was no overall increase in measures of partisan prejudice between periods. We document this in our original data and using the 2012 and 2016 ANES. Moreover, the most affectively polarized members of the public became no more likely to hold prejudicial attitudes towards the other party. Despite an intervening campaign with elevated elite hostility and rampant discord after the 2016 election, the limits on partisan prejudice identified in prior research remain in place. This stability is important for understanding the nature and malleability of partisan affect.