Social Network Disagreement and Reasoned Candidate Preferences

AuthorAllison L. Williams,Brianna A. Smith,Hannah Kim,Pierce D. Ekstrom
Published date01 January 2020
Date01 January 2020
DOIhttp://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X19858343
Subject MatterArticles
https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X19858343
American Politics Research
2020, Vol. 48(1) 132 –154
© The Author(s) 2019
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1532673X19858343
journals.sagepub.com/home/apr
Article
Social Network
Disagreement and
Reasoned Candidate
Preferences
Pierce D. Ekstrom1, Brianna A. Smith2, Allison
L. Williams1, and Hannah Kim1
Abstract
This study investigates the effects of social network disagreement on
candidate preferences. Although much research has explored the effects
of disagreement on political tolerance and disengagement, less work has
examined the relation between disagreement and political reasoning. We
predicted that because disagreement reveals conflicting points of view
and motivates people to consider these views, it should promote more
effortful reasoning—and thus increased reliance on policy preferences
and decreased reliance on party identification when choosing between
candidates. Using panel data from the 2008 and 2012 U.S. Presidential
elections, we find that respondents in high-disagreement networks tend
to shift their candidate preferences to align with their policy preferences
regardless of their party identification. In low-disagreement networks,
respondents tended to follow party over policy. In sum, the determinants
of candidate preferences differ depending on individuals’ social networks.
In some cases, disagreement may promote more normatively desirable
political decision-making.
1University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA
2U.S. Naval Academy, Annapolis, MD, USA
Corresponding Author:
Hannah Kim, Department of Political Science, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Email: hannahkim80@gmail.com
858343APRXXX10.1177/1532673X19858343American Politics ResearchEkstrom et al.
research-article2019
Ekstrom et al. 133
Keywords
social networks, disagreement, candidate preferences, voting behavior
Although the act of voting is relatively solitary, the decision it represents is
very much a social one, with implications for the groups and coalitions that
the candidates represent and for the policies that govern society as a whole.
Citizens’ votes reflect their thoughts and opinions in the context of the people
who surround them. Recognizing this fact, a growing body of research has
explored the role of social networks in political reasoning and behavior.
Much of this research has explored the effects—some salutary, some trou-
bling—of political disagreement within a network of close friends and fam-
ily. On one hand, disagreement has been found to predict greater tolerance for
political opponents and their views (Mutz, 2002a, 2006) and to help individu-
als accumulate larger and more even-handed stores of political information
(Huckfeldt, Johnson, & Sprague, 2004). On the other hand, disagreement has
been found to predict political disengagement (Mutz, 2002b, 2006)—though
some investigations have suggested that this relation depends critically on
other factors (Huckfeldt, Mendez, & Osborn, 2004; McClurg, 2006).
In the current study, we explore another normative consequence of politi-
cal disagreement—the depth and quality of individuals’ political reasoning
(see Erisen & Erisen, 2012). Specifically, we examine whether the relative
impact of party identification and policy preferences on candidate prefer-
ences depends on the extent to which voters experience disagreement within
their social networks. When voters are surrounded by like-minded others, we
expect party allegiance to dominate candidate preferences; however, we pre-
dict that those voters who experience frequent or intense political disagree-
ment with close others will give more weight to their policy preferences and
less to their party identification when choosing between candidates. We
ground this prediction in existing research that suggests that policy voting is
more cognitively demanding than party-line voting and that network dis-
agreement tends to create conditions that facilitate more in-depth, elaborate
cognitive processing.
Defining Disagreement
Researchers have examined many different forms of “disagreement.” We here
focus on individuals’ subjective experience of disagreement with close others
how often and how intensely people debate politics with those they care about.
At one extreme, individuals in high-disagreement networks feel that they rou-
tinely encounter challenges to their political views. At the other extreme,

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT