Partisan or Principled? Explaining Political Differences in Attitudes About Violations of Democratic Norms

Although both Democrats and Republicans tend to be more tolerant of democratic norm violations that benefit their own party, this pattern is not always symmetrical, even when political stakes appear identical. Two experiments (<i>N</i> = 2,352) tested competing explanations: that partisans differ in democratic commitment, their tendency to rationalize violations as legitimate, or the values they prioritize (e.g., voter access vs. election integrity). Both parties rationalized weaker opposition to beneficial violations as more democratic. However, Republicans in Study 1 were more responsive to partisan advantage without showing similarly greater democratic rationalization and more tolerant of mail-in voting restrictions regardless of partisan benefit. These differences disappeared in Study 2 when different violations were tested, suggesting such asymmetries are issue-specific rather than fixed. Overall, the findings suggest that partisan gaps in support for democratic norm violations reflect the politicization of particular practices more than stable differences in commitment to democracy.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
Published
2025-10-31
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672251372671
Primary Topic
Social and Intergroup Psychology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Partisan or Principled? Explaining Political Differences in Attitudes About Violations of Democratic Norms

Paul E. Teas
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
Social and Intergroup Psychology
article

Partisan or Principled? Explaining Political Differences in Attitudes About Violations of Democratic Norms

Paul E. Teas
article en

Abstract

Although both Democrats and Republicans tend to be more tolerant of democratic norm violations that benefit their own party, this pattern is not always symmetrical, even when political stakes appear identical. Two experiments (<i>N</i> = 2,352) tested competing explanations: that partisans differ in democratic commitment, their tendency to rationalize violations as legitimate, or the values they prioritize (e.g., voter access vs. election integrity). Both parties rationalized weaker opposition to beneficial violations as more democratic. However, Republicans in Study 1 were more responsive to partisan advantage without showing similarly greater democratic rationalization and more tolerant of mail-in voting restrictions regardless of partisan benefit. These differences disappeared in Study 2 when different violations were tested, suggesting such asymmetries are issue-specific rather than fixed. Overall, the findings suggest that partisan gaps in support for democratic norm violations reflect the politicization of particular practices more than stable differences in commitment to democracy.

Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
University of Chicago (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 59%
Social and Intergroup Psychology
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.