AJPS — 2026-08-26
Original Partisan bias in a sorted party system: A problem of epistemic inequality
Justin Pottle
Abstract
Abstract Normative and empirical scholars typically treat partisans’ distrust of their political rivals as a product of individual cognitive biases. But even if bias is inevitable, it is parties’ coalition‐building and messaging strategies that determine who bias is directed toward. This paper argues that the social sorting of party conflict exacerbates the epistemic and democratic harm of partisan distrust by generating distinctive patterns of epistemic inequality. I show that when voters associate parties with particular social groups, members of those groups suffer greater risk of testimonial injustice and related credibility deficits owing to their perceived partisanship. These dynamics are most damaging for members of marginalized groups, as party–group overlap can reinforce the prejudices they already face. Addressing these harms, I argue, requires looking beyond individual partisans to the background features of party systems that shape how elites mobilize group identities and animus in the struggle for office.
APSR — pp. 1-20 2026-07-30 Original Redistricting Reforms Reduce Gerrymandering by Constraining Partisan Actors
CORY McCARTAN, CHRISTOPHER T. KENNY, TYLER SIMKO, EMMA EBOWE, MICHAEL Y. ZHAO, KOSUKE IMAI
JOP 88/3 pp. 1245-1257 2026-07-01 Original Does Informing Partisans About Partisan Bias Reduce Partisan Bias?
Diogo Ferrari
Abstract
This registered report study examines whether informing partisans about the party cue effect reduces partisan bias in policy judgments. It employs an experimental design in which subjects are informed that party cues induce people who identify with a party to take policy positions because the party does and that there are potential drawbacks of relying on party cues instead of reflecting on the policy content. The hypothesis is that those who are aware of the party cue effect will be less likely to rely on party cues when making policy judgments compared to those who are not informed.
APSR — pp. 1-19 2026-03-03 Original Partisan Expressive Responding: Lessons from Two Decades of Research
MATTHEW H. GRAHAM
Abstract
Research on partisan expressive responding suggests that the beliefs people express in surveys are more partisan than their underlying perceptions. This article examines the scope and importance of expressive responding through a meta-reanalysis of 44 studies from 25 articles. On average, treatments designed to reduce expressive responding shrink measured partisan bias by about 25%. Across the 242 survey questions in the data, treatments increase the correlation between the average Democrat’s and Republican’s beliefs from 0.81 to 0.86. Contrary to expectations derived from the two leading theories of expressive responding, misreporting (“cheerleading”) and congenial inference, there is no evidence that expressive responding increases in partisan identity strength or educational attainment. As research on expressive responding enters its third decade, greater emphasis on design-based tests of mechanisms may help build a firmer understanding of the nature and substantive importance of expressive responding—namely, whether the forces that produce expressive responding in surveys also shape real-world political judgments.