Affective polarization and support for democratic principles in Israel

This study examines whether citizens at different levels of affective polarization weigh democratic principles and institutional features differently when evaluating political alternatives in Israel. We analyze two conjoint survey experiments conducted among Jewish Israelis in 2024 and 2025. The randomized conjoint attributes allow us to estimate the effects of democratic and institutional attributes on political evaluations and to assess whether these effects vary across observed levels of affective polarization. To evaluate this heterogeneity, we use both an in-party/out-party measure and multiparty spread-of-affect measures. Across both studies, joint tests provide no consistent evidence that the effects of democratic attributes systematically vary with affective polarization. The findings suggest that, in the absence of explicit partisan cues, affective polarization does not systematically condition the weight citizens place on democratic principles and institutions. Because affective polarization itself is not experimentally manipulated, these findings concern heterogeneous responses to randomized democratic attributes rather than the causal effect of affective polarization, and they do not address situations in which democratic principles explicitly conflict with partisan interests.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Elections Public Opinion and Parties
Published
2026-10-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/17457289.2026.2750935
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

Affective polarization and support for democratic principles in Israel

Shingo Hamanaka
Journal of Elections Public Opinion and Parties
Electoral Systems and Political Participation
article

Affective polarization and support for democratic principles in Israel

Shingo Hamanaka
article en

Abstract

This study examines whether citizens at different levels of affective polarization weigh democratic principles and institutional features differently when evaluating political alternatives in Israel. We analyze two conjoint survey experiments conducted among Jewish Israelis in 2024 and 2025. The randomized conjoint attributes allow us to estimate the effects of democratic and institutional attributes on political evaluations and to assess whether these effects vary across observed levels of affective polarization. To evaluate this heterogeneity, we use both an in-party/out-party measure and multiparty spread-of-affect measures. Across both studies, joint tests provide no consistent evidence that the effects of democratic attributes systematically vary with affective polarization. The findings suggest that, in the absence of explicit partisan cues, affective polarization does not systematically condition the weight citizens place on democratic principles and institutions. Because affective polarization itself is not experimentally manipulated, these findings concern heterogeneous responses to randomized democratic attributes rather than the causal effect of affective polarization, and they do not address situations in which democratic principles explicitly conflict with partisan interests.

Journal of Elections Public Opinion and Parties
Ryukoku University (JP)
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
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.

Affective polarization and support for democratic principles in Israel — Shingo Hamanaka · Journal of Elections Public Opinion and Parties (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS