Political Belief Systems Are Not Singularly Rooted in Alliance Psychology

References

• Azevedo, F., Jost, J. T., Rothmund, T., & Sterling, J. (2019). Neoliberal ideology and the justification of inequality in capitalist societies: Why social and economic dimensions of ideology are intertwined. Journal of Social Issues, 75(1), 49–88. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12310
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bisgaard, M. (2019). How getting the facts right can fuel partisan‐motivated reasoning. American Journal of Political Science, 63(4), 824–839. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12432
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carpini, M. X. D., & Keeter, S. (1996). What Americans know about politics and why it matters. Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, G. L. (2003). Party Over Policy: The dominating impact of group influence on political beliefs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(5), 808–822. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.5.808
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Converse, P. (1964). The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In D. Apter (Ed.), Ideology and Discontent. Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Costello, T. H., Bowes, S. M., Malka, A., Baldwin, M., & Tasimi, A. (2023). Revisiting the rigidity-of-the-right hypothesis: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 124(5), 1025–1052. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000446
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellis, C., & Stimson, J. A. (2012). Ideology in America. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Federico, C. M. (2020). Ideology and public opinion. In A. Berinsky (Ed.), New directions in public opinion (3rd ed., pp. 75–98). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Federico, C. M. (2021). The personality basis of political preferences. In D. Osborne & C. G. Sibley (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of political psychology. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/87c3y
   Google Scholar
• Federico, C. M., Fisher, E. L., & Deason, G. (2011). Expertise and the ideological consequences of the authoritarian predisposition. Public Opinion Quarterly, 75(4), 686–708. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfr026
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Federico, C. M., & Goren, P. (2009). Motivated social cognition and ideology: Is attention to elite discourse a prerequisite for epistemically motivated political affinities? In J. T. Jost, A. C. Kay, and H. Thorisdottir (Eds.), Social and psychological bases of ideology and system justification (pp. 267–291). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Federico, C. M., & Malka, A. (2018). The contingent, contextual nature of the relationship between needs for security and certainty and political preferences: Evidence and implications. Political Psychology, 39, 3–48. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12477
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Federico, C. M., & Malka, A. (2023). Ideology: The psychological and social foundations of belief systems. In L. Huddy, D. Sears, J. Levy, and J. Jerit (Eds.), Oxford handbook of political psychology (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/xhvyj
   Google Scholar
• Federico, C. M., & Reifen Tagar, M. (2014). Zeroing in on the right: Education and the partisan expression of authoritarianism. Political Behavior, 36(3), 581–603. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-013-9250-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feldman, S. (1988). Structure and consistency in public opinion: The role of core beliefs and values. American Journal of Political Science, 32(2), 416–440. https://doi.org/10.2307/2111130
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feldman, S., & Johnston, C. (2014). Understanding the determinants of political ideology: Implications of structural complexity. Political Psychology, 35(3), 337–358. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12055
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiske, S. T. (2018). Social beings: Core motives in social psychology. John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Goren, P. (2004). Political sophistication and policy reasoning: A reconsideration. American Journal of Political Science, 48(3), 462–478. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0092-5853.2004.00081.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goren, P. (2012). On voter competence. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Groenendyk, E. (2013). Competing motives in the partisan mind: How loyalty and responsiveness shape party identification and democracy. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Groenendyk, E. (2018). Competing motives in a polarized electorate: political responsiveness, identity defensiveness, and the rise of partisan antipathy. Political Psychology, 39(S1), 159–171. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12481
   Google Scholar
• Groenendyk, E., Kimbrough, E. O., & Pickup, M. (2022). How norms shape the nature of belief systems in mass publics. American Journal of Political Science, 67, 623–638. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12717
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Groenendyk, E., & Krupnikov, Y. (2021). What motivates reasoning? A theory of goal‐dependent political evaluation. American Journal of Political Science, 65(1), 180–196. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12562
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guay, B., & Johnston, C. D. (2022). Ideological asymmetries and the determinants of politically motivated reasoning. American Journal of Political Science, 66(2), 285–301. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12624
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haidt, J. (2012). The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion. Random House.
   Google Scholar
• Hardin, C. D., & Higgins, E. T. (1996). Shared reality: How social verification makes the subjective objective. In E. T. Higgins & R. M. Sorrentino (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition: The interpersonal context (Vol. 3, pp. 28–84). Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hatemi, P. K., Eaves, L., & McDermott, R. (2012). It’s the end of ideology as we know it. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 24(3), 345–369. https://doi.org/10.1177/0951629812437749
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huddy, L., Mason, L., & Aaroe, L. (2015). Expressive partisanship: Campaign involvement, political. emotion, and partisan identity. American Political Science Review, 109(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055414000604
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnston, C. D., Lavine, H. G., & Federico, C. M. (2017). Open versus closed: Personality, identity, and the politics of redistribution. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jost, J. T. (2021). Left and right: The psychological significance of a political distinction. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. J. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129(3), 339–375. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.3.339
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jost, J. T., Federico, C. M., & Napier, J. L. (2009). Political Ideology: Its structure, functions, and elective affinities. Annual Review of Psychology, 60(1), 307–337. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163600
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jost, J. T., Ledgerwood, A., & Hardin, C. D. (2008). Shared reality, system justification, and the relational basis of ideological beliefs. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2(1), 171–186. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2007.00056.x
   Google Scholar
• Kahan, D. M. (2015). The expressive rationality of inaccurate perceptions. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 40, 26–28.
   Google Scholar
• Khanna, K., & Sood, G. (2018). Motivated responding in studies of factual learning. Political Behavior, 40(1), 79–101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-017-9395-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kinder, D. R., & Kalmoe, N. P. (2017). Neither liberal nor conservative: Ideological innocence in the American public. University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lavine, H. G., Johnston, C. D., & Steenbergen, M. R. (2012). The ambivalent partisan: How critical loyalty promotes democracy. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Layman, G. C., & Carsey, T. M. (2002). Party polarization and “conflict extension” in the American electorate. American Journal of Political Science, 46(4), 786–802. https://doi.org/10.2307/3088434
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis, V. (2021). The problem of Donald Trump and the static spectrum fallacy. Party Politics, 27(4), 605–618. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068819871673
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ludeke, S., Johnson, W., & Bouchard, T. J. (2013). “Obedience to traditional authority:” A heritable factor underlying authoritarianism, conservatism and religiousness. Personality and Individual Differences, 55(4), 375–380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.03.018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lupia, A., & McCubbins, M. D. (1998). The democratic dilemma: Can citizens learn what they need to know? Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Malka, A., & Adelman, M. (2022). Expressive survey responding: A closer look at the evidence and its implications for American democracy. Perspectives on Politics, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592721004096
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malka, A., & Costello, T. H. (2023). Professed democracy support and openness to politically congenial authoritarian actions within the American public. American Politics Research, 51(3), 327–342. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X221109532
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malka, A., & Lelkes, Y. (2010). More than ideology: Conservative–liberal identity and receptivity to political cues. Social Justice Research, 23(2–3), 156–188. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-010-0114-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malka, A., Lelkes, Y., & Soto, C. J. (2019). Are cultural and economic conservatism positively correlated? A large-scale cross-national test. British Journal of Political Science, 49(3), 1045–1069., 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123417000072
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malka, A., Lelkes, Y., Bakker, B. N., & Spivack, E. (2020). Who is open to authoritarian governance within western democracies? Perspectives on Politics, 20(3), 808–827.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malka, A., Soto, C. J., Inzlicht, M., & Lelkes, Y. (2014). Do needs for security and certainty predict cultural and economic conservatism? A cross-national analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106(6), 1031–1051. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036170
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noel, H. (2012). The coalition merchants: The ideological roots of the civil rights realignment. The Journal of Politics, 74(1), 156–173. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022381611001186
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noel, H. (2014). Political ideologies and political parties in America. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ollerenshaw, T., & Johnston, C. D. (2022). The conditional relationship of psychological needs to ideology: A large-scale replication. Public Opinion Quarterly, 86(2), 369–380. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfac004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petersen, M. B. (2015). Evolutionary political psychology: On the origin and structure of heuristics and biases in politics. Political Psychology, 36(S1), 45–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12237
   Google Scholar
• Petersen, M. B., & Aarøe, L. (2012). Is the political animal politically ignorant? Applying evolutionary psychology to the study of political attitudes. Evolutionary Psychology, 10(5), 147470491201000. https://doi.org/10.1177/147470491201000504
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petersen, M. B., Skov, M., Serritzlew, S., & Ramsøy, T. (2013). Motivated reasoning and political parties: Evidence for increased processing in the face of party cues. Political Behavior, 35(4), 831–854. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-012-9213-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sniderman, P. M., Brody, R. A., & Tetlock, P. E. (1991). Reasoning and choice. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sniderman, P. M., & Bullock, J. (2004). A consistency theory of public opinion and political choice: The hypothesis of menu dependence. In W. E. Saris & P. M. Sniderman (Eds.), Studies in public opinion: Attitudes, nonattitudes, measurement error, and change (pp. 337–357). Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stern, C., & Ondish, P. (2018). Political aspects of shared reality. Current Opinion in Psychology, 23, 11–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.11.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tappin, B. M., Berinsky, A. J., & Rand, D. G. (2023). Partisans’ receptivity to persuasive messaging is undiminished by countervailing party leader cues. Nature Human Behaviour, 7(4), 568–582. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-023-01551-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tappin, B. M., Pennycook, G., & Rand, D. G. (2020). Thinking clearly about causal inferences of politically motivated reasoning: Why paradigmatic study designs often undermine causal inference. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 34, 81–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2020.01.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weeden, J., & Kurzban, R. (2014). The hidden agenda of the political mind. Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zaller, J. (1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar