Partisan Rationalization and Evaluations of (Un)Democratic Behaviors: The Amplifying Role of Affective Polarization

This study examines how partisan identities shape citizens’ perceptions of democratic and undemocratic behavior by politicians. Drawing on theories of partisan-motivated reasoning, we argue that partisan identities serve as powerful directional goals that unconsciously bias how citizens evaluate political behaviors against democratic principles. Crucially, we theorize that affective polarization amplifies these partisan rationalization biases by strengthening in-party attachment and out-party animosity. Through a survey experiment in South Korea, we find that citizens systematically rationalize their democratic perceptions based on partisan affiliation, perceiving both regular and undemocratic behaviors by co-partisan politicians as more democratic than similar behaviors by out-partisan politicians. Remarkably, citizens even view undemocratic behaviors by co-partisan politicians as more democratic than regular behaviors by out-partisan politicians. Furthermore, we demonstrate that affective polarization significantly amplifies these partisan rationalization biases. Citizens with higher levels of affective polarization are more susceptible to partisan rationalization of democratic perceptions and show stronger perceptual biases compared to those with lower affective polarization. These findings help explain how partisan rationalization and affective polarization can distort citizens’ perceptions of democracy, potentially undermining their ability to serve as a check against democratic backsliding.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Political Studies
Published
2026-04-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/00323217261431497
Primary Topic
Electoral Systems and Political Participation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Partisan Rationalization and Evaluations of (Un)Democratic Behaviors: The Amplifying Role of Affective Polarization

Yunmin Nam, Wonbin Cho, Nam Kyu Kim, Joonseok Yang
Political Studies
Electoral Systems and Political Participation
article

Partisan Rationalization and Evaluations of (Un)Democratic Behaviors: The Amplifying Role of Affective Polarization

Yunmin Nam, Wonbin Cho, Nam Kyu Kim, Joonseok Yang
article en

Abstract

This study examines how partisan identities shape citizens’ perceptions of democratic and undemocratic behavior by politicians. Drawing on theories of partisan-motivated reasoning, we argue that partisan identities serve as powerful directional goals that unconsciously bias how citizens evaluate political behaviors against democratic principles. Crucially, we theorize that affective polarization amplifies these partisan rationalization biases by strengthening in-party attachment and out-party animosity. Through a survey experiment in South Korea, we find that citizens systematically rationalize their democratic perceptions based on partisan affiliation, perceiving both regular and undemocratic behaviors by co-partisan politicians as more democratic than similar behaviors by out-partisan politicians. Remarkably, citizens even view undemocratic behaviors by co-partisan politicians as more democratic than regular behaviors by out-partisan politicians. Furthermore, we demonstrate that affective polarization significantly amplifies these partisan rationalization biases. Citizens with higher levels of affective polarization are more susceptible to partisan rationalization of democratic perceptions and show stronger perceptual biases compared to those with lower affective polarization. These findings help explain how partisan rationalization and affective polarization can distort citizens’ perceptions of democracy, potentially undermining their ability to serve as a check against democratic backsliding.

Political Studies
Yonsei University (KR), Korea University (KR), Kongju National University (KR), Sungkyunkwan University (KR)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Electoral Systems and Political Participation
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.