Partisan Ambivalence, Partisan Intensity, and Racial Attitudes: The Impact of Shifting Policy Positions on Partisan Evaluations in the 1960s

• Author: Judd R. Thornton,Robert N. Lupton
• Date: 01 November 2019
• DOI: 10.1177/1532673X18783999
• Published date: 01 November 2019
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X18783999

American Politics Research

2019, Vol. 47(6) 1259 –1282

© The Author(s) 2018

Reprints and permissions:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/1532673X18783999

journals.sagepub.com/home/apr

https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X18783999

American Politics Research

2019, Vol. 47(6) 1259 –1282

© The Author(s) 2018

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/1532673X18783999

journals.sagepub.com/home/apr

Article

Partisan Ambivalence,

Partisan Intensity, and

Racial Attitudes: The

Impact of Shifting Policy

Positions on Partisan

Evaluations in the 1960s

Robert N. Lupton1 and Judd R. Thornton2

Abstract

The concept of ambivalence is important to the study of political psychology

and behavior. We examine the causes of partisan ambivalence following the

passage of major civil rights legislation to test our argument that the correlates

of ambivalence will change following the alteration of long-standing party

positions on a highly salient issue. We find support for this hypothesis for

White Southerners during this time period—Indeed, our results demonstrate

that the strength of one’s partisan attachment is unrelated to partisan

evaluations for such individuals immediately following the passage of major

civil rights legislation, but is again a predictor by the early 1970s.

Keywords

partisan ambivalence, Southern politics, party realignment

The concept of ambivalence has become increasingly important to the study

of political psychology and public opinion. The considerable impact of ambiv-

alence on subsequent attitude formation and behavior is well documented

1University of Connecticut, Storrs, USA

2Georgia State University, Atlanta, USA

Corresponding Author:

Judd R. Thornton, Georgia State University, 38 Peachtree Center Avenue, Suite 1005, Atlanta,

GA 30350, USA.

Email: jrthornton@gsu.edu

783999APRXXX10.1177/1532673X18783999American Politics ResearchLupton and Thornton

research-article2018

1260 American Politics Research 47(6)

(e.g., Lavine, 2001; Lavine, Johnston, & Steenbergen, 2012; Meffert, Guge, &

Lodge, 2004). Likewise, we now have a growing understanding of the causes

of ambivalence (e.g., Keele & Wolak, 2008; Rudolph & Popp, 2007). Yet

because nearly all of this evidence is from surveys conducted roughly in the

last 25 years, the broad social and political context of these studies is similar.

Here, we examine the causes of ambivalence toward the parties in a different

era: the presidential elections immediately following the passage of major

civil rights legislation in the 1960s. We argue that following the alteration of

long-standing positions on a highly salient issue the influence of partisanship

on ambivalence will be attenuated while that of the attitudes relevant to the

policy will be heightened. Specifically, we believe that among individuals for

whom the elite change is most salient—in this case, White Southerners—the

degree to which individuals are one-sided or conflicted in their evaluations of

the parties according to stated likes and dislikes of their own as well as the

opposite party will be unaffected by partisan attachments during this period,

and will instead be influenced by racial attitudes. The context of the mid-to-

late 1960s offers a clear test of these hypotheses given the lack of visible

major party positions on civil rights legislation until this point. Comparing the

correlates of partisan ambivalence in the periods before, during, and after the

major parties polarize on a salient issue enhances our knowledge of the con-

textual influences on an important psychological phenomenon.

The party system, especially in the South, was in flux in the 1960s fol-

lowing the passage of two important pieces of civil rights legislation. As a

result of this abrupt change in policy stances on the issue of race, we argue

that evaluations of the parties among Southerners will be less dependent on

the strength of individuals’ party identification and more dependent on their

racial attitudes compared with citizens elsewhere. We find support for the

hypothesis that the correlates of ambivalence were different for White

Southerners during this period—In both 1964 and 1968, the impact of par-

tisan intensity is weaker among Southerners, and racial attitudes predict

ambivalence in our 1968 Southern sample. We interpret this result as being

consistent with evidence demonstrating that although partisans did not

immediately leave their party during this period (Green & Palmquist, 1994;

Green, Palmquist, & Shickler, 1998, 2002), the electorate did respond to

elite polarization on the issue of race (Carmines & Stimson, 1989; Valentino

& Sears, 2005). Even if White Southerners did not abandon their party

identification straightaway, we argue that their partisan identity became

“decoupled” from their evaluations of the parties and as a result their parti-

sanship played a smaller role in shaping attitudes toward the parties. That

is, Southerners’ expressed likes and dislikes of the parties, and thus their

likelihood of experiencing ambivalence became divorced from their