The Michigan school
Drawing on surveys of American voters, Campbell and colleagues (1960) argued that many voters experience parties not as bundles of policies but as groups they belong to, much like religious or ethnic groups. Party identification is mainly inherited from parents and formed in childhood, and once established it changes little. Using the model of a funnel of causality, they explained that long-term factors such as social background and party identification filter evaluations of short-term factors such as candidate images and issues, leading to the final vote choice. Converse (1969) reported that party identification strengthens across generations as experience with democratic elections accumulates, explaining why partisan attachment is weak in new democracies.
Revisionism and dealignment
Fiorina (1981) viewed party identification as a running tally of evaluations of past government and party performance, meaning that voters gradually update their attitudes toward parties based on conditions such as the economy. Franklin and Jackson (1983) likewise showed that party identification can change in response to issue positions and evaluations. This perspective linked party identification to a rational choice framework. Meanwhile, Dalton (1984) argued that as education levels rose and cognitive mobilization through direct access to media information increased, voters relied less on parties as shortcuts, producing partisan dealignment in advanced democracies.
Partisan bias and polarization
Bartels (2002) showed that party identification is not merely the result of evaluations but shapes how people perceive objective facts such as economic conditions: under the same economy, supporters of the governing party perceive it more favorably and opponents less favorably. This relates to psychological processes such as confirmation bias and selective exposure. Treating party identification as a social identity, Iyengar, Sood and Lelkes (2012) found that in the United States affective polarization, dislike of the other party's supporters, has grown faster than differences in policy ideology. Party identification has thus become a key concept for understanding political polarization today.
FAQ
- What is party identification in simple terms?
- It is a voter's sense that a party is their side, much like a sports team they support. It is mostly formed in childhood within the family and acts like a pair of glasses through which candidates and policies are judged.
- Does party identification never change?
- The Michigan school saw it as highly stable, but scholars such as Fiorina argued that it can shift gradually with government performance and issues. Rising education and information have also produced dealignment, a weakening of party identification.
Sources reviewed: 2026-10-26
References
- Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, W. E., & Stokes, D. E. (1960). The American Voter. New York: Wiley. The Michigan-school classic that defined party identification.
- Converse, P. E. (1969). Of time and partisan stability. Comparative Political Studies, 2(2), 139–171. Partisanship strengthens with democratic experience over time.
- Fiorina, M. P. (1981). Retrospective Voting in American National Elections. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Party ID as a running tally of retrospective evaluations.
- Franklin, C. H., & Jackson, J. E. (1983). The dynamics of party identification. American Political Science Review, 77(4), 957–973. Shows party ID responds to issues and evaluations.
- Dalton, R. J. (1984). Cognitive mobilization and partisan dealignment in advanced industrial democracies. Journal of Politics, 46(1), 264–284. Cognitive mobilization and partisan dealignment.
- Bartels, L. M. (2002). Beyond the running tally: Partisan bias in political perceptions. Political Behavior, 24(2), 117–150. Partisanship biases perceptions of objective conditions.
- Iyengar, S., Sood, G., & Lelkes, Y. (2012). Affect, not ideology: A social identity perspective on polarization. Public Opinion Quarterly, 76(3), 405–431. Affective polarization from a social identity perspective.
