Evidence on the Political Psychological Potency of the Urban-Rural Divide

• In Event: Geographic Divisions

Abstract

Geographic polarization, also known as the urban-rural divide, is among the most defining features of contemporary politics in the United States. Recent advancements in the study of partisan polarization have shown that partisan “social sorting” in the electorate is a significant driving force behind intensifying polarization (Mason 2018). As this work demonstrates, social sorting can occur and contribute to polarization regardless of whether individuals are aware that it is occurring, but its effects are strongest when people also perceive it (i.e., “subjective” social sorting).

In this paper, I investigate two major questions. First, I study whether subjective social sorting also functions similarly among urban/rural identities, which have thus far received little attention in the nascent social sorting literature. To do so, I randomize exposure to factual information regarding the geographic partisan divide and compare responses to various survey-based measures of polarization between treatment and control. Importantly, I will also measure knowledge of the urban-rural divide. This experimental approach allows me to simultaneously compare the effects of objective social sorting vs. subjective social sorting among urbanites and ruralites (e.g., comparing rural Republicans in the treatment group to rural Republicans in the control group who have low levels of knowledge about the urban-rural divide), and to discern the effect that priming the urban-rural divide has on levels of affective polarization (i.e., comparing urban/rural Democrats/Republicans in the treatment to urban/rural Democrats/Republicans in the control group).

Second, and perhaps most intriguingly, I study the effects of geographic identity labels on public opinion. To do so, I solicit the (self-reported) geographic identity of respondents. My measure of geographic identity for this second study is deliberately crude and, importantly, features a “Somewhere between urban and rural/I don’t know category.” Those who select this category are then asked to provide their zip code and told that the zipcode will be matched to an official database in order to determine their “official” designation on the urban-rural continuum. These respondents are then randomly told that their zip code is designated either as “Somewhat Rural” or “Somewhat Urban. Next, these respondents asked a series of questions regarding evaluations of the parties, place-based demographic groups, the electoral college, as well as their degree of familiarity with the urban-rural divide. Responses between the “Somewhat Rural” and “Somewhat Urban” groups are compared to discern the effect of geographic identity assignment.

Overall, this paper makes a considerable contribution to our collective knowledge regarding the political psychology of the rural-urban divide.

Author

• Kal Munis