Backlash Blues: Assessing How Political Scientists Conceptualize (or Don’t) Reactionary Force

This study references 1,211 articles that mention “backlash” in sixteen political science journals to investigate how the term is understood and used in political science. We find that while backlash is frequently invoked to describe fast and reactionary force, who is impacted by backlash and how is often left unspecified. To address this gap, we suggest a distinction between two major dimensions of backlash. The first is embodied backlash, a treatment of the concept that centers negative impacts to marginalized groups and conflict over the distribution of power, and the second is indiscriminate backlash, which encompasses the large variety of backlash against inanimate objects and processes. A thorough review of the literature leads to our argument that embodied backlash is a necessary, but insufficient step for understanding the range of work backlash is purported to do. We conclude by arguing that several sets of questions require clarification before, and if, backlash can serve to meaningfully describe marginalized experiences of negative force and serve as a basis for analysis.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Polity
Published
2026-02-05
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1086/739670
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Populism, Right-Wing Movements
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
64.82
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Backlash Blues: Assessing How Political Scientists Conceptualize (or Don’t) Reactionary Force

Erica Townsend-Bell, Zein Murib
1 citations
Polity
Populism, Right-Wing Movements
64.82
article

Backlash Blues: Assessing How Political Scientists Conceptualize (or Don’t) Reactionary Force

Erica Townsend-Bell, Zein Murib
article en
1 citations

Abstract

This study references 1,211 articles that mention “backlash” in sixteen political science journals to investigate how the term is understood and used in political science. We find that while backlash is frequently invoked to describe fast and reactionary force, who is impacted by backlash and how is often left unspecified. To address this gap, we suggest a distinction between two major dimensions of backlash. The first is embodied backlash, a treatment of the concept that centers negative impacts to marginalized groups and conflict over the distribution of power, and the second is indiscriminate backlash, which encompasses the large variety of backlash against inanimate objects and processes. A thorough review of the literature leads to our argument that embodied backlash is a necessary, but insufficient step for understanding the range of work backlash is purported to do. We conclude by arguing that several sets of questions require clarification before, and if, backlash can serve to meaningfully describe marginalized experiences of negative force and serve as a basis for analysis.

PolityVol. 58(2)
Fordham University (US), Oklahoma State University Oklahoma City (US)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 0%
Populism, Right-Wing Movements
64.82
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.

Backlash Blues: Assessing How Political Scientists Conceptualize (or Don’t) Reactionary Force — Erica Townsend-Bell, Zein Murib · Polity (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS