Party identification

Party identification is a political term to describe a voter's underlying allegiance to a political party. The term was first used in the United States in the 1950s, but use of the term has decreased in usage as the process of party dealignment has accelerated.

According to modern theories of political socialization, partisanship is typically formed between the ages of 18 and 24, and is generally stable after that. It is a psychological attachment that most Americans develop towards a political party. Several theories, including macropartisanship attempt to explain shifts in partisanship over time.

Party identification is a psychological attachment toward a political party that tends to influence a person's decisions on social, economic and political issues. A person who identifies with a particular political party is called a partisan. The partisan accepts the standard beliefs and policies of the party as a summary of his/her political views and preferences. In the United States, the main party identifications are: Democrat, Republican, and independent. In the U.S., a political party has three defined parts:- Government (members of the party who hold public office).- Organization (committees, leaders and activists who work to promote the party and the candidates).- Electorate (citizens who support the party through party identification).

Citizens in the general population who identify with a particular party make up the Party in the Electorate. Party identifiers (partisans) could be described by their support in the following ways:- They register as a member of the particular party when registered to vote.- They tend to vote for candidates in their particular party in most elections.- When surveyed, they identify themselves as a member of that particular party.- They are inclined to support policies endorsed by the particular party.- They tend to volunteer for campaigns to support party candidates more than the general population.- They have a higher voter turnout in primary elections than the general population.

Some researchers view party identification as " a form of social identity" [Hershey, 101] , in the same way that a person identifies with a religious or ethnic group. This identity develops early in a person's life mainly through family and social influences. This description would make party identification a stable perspective, which develops as a consequence of personal, family, social and environmental factors. Other researchers consider party identification to be more flexible and more of a conscious choice. They see it as a position and a choice based on the continued assessment of the political, economic and social environment. Party identification can increase or even shift by motivating events or conditions in the country.

Characterization

Party Identification is characterized in three ways

# Some view party attachment as a form of social identity, which is similar to a religious or ethnic identity.
# Some View party attachment as a perceptual screen, a view of the political world that can sort through any conflicting information that one may encounter in life
# The third way party identification is characterized is that it is perceived as changeable. One's experiences (whether positive or negative) with the party's performance in office helps the individual make voting decisions without knowing much about the party's candidate.

Development

Family is the most common source for our first party identification because of their involvement in early life. Although influence can begin to take place as early as elementary school years, party ID is typically formed between the ages of 18 and 24.

Childhood Influence is one of main driving factors behind formation of party identification. During childhood, the main political influence comes from parents, other close family members and close surroundings such as the immediate community. Children remember events that happened during their childhood and associate them with the political party, whether or not they were connected with those events. For example, a child growing up in the 1970s would associate the Republican party with the Watergate scandal of the Nixon administration, a child growing up in the 1990s would associate the Democratic party with the sex scandal of the Clinton administration, or a child growing up in early 2000 would associate the Republican party with the Iraqi War on Terror. Although these parties might or might not embrace the issues that happened during that administration, a child will forever associate the party with those memorable events.

Political Scientists have developed many theories to childhood influence on political party identification. David O'Sears developed a theory stating that major childhood events will influence a child at a young age and make a permanent impression.

Adulthood

During adulthood, people can begin to adjust their party loyalties according to their personal experiences. The longer an individual holds a party ID, the stronger that attachment to the party becomes. Because of this, Older adults are more likely to hold strong party attachments, and less likely to change them than young adults. One third of Americans call themselves strong partisans, 28% express some party identification, though choose not to express it as strong.

Change

Party ID changes can occur in times of party coalition change, or realignment. During these times, party coalitions themselves are being transformed, and as a result, people are more likely to desert the party of their parents. It is during these times of partisan turmoil when younger adults are more likely to change party ID.

Measuring Party Identification

It is important to measure party identification in order to determine its strengths and weaknesses. Political Scientists have developed many ways to measure party identification in order to examine and evaluate it.

One method of measuring party identification uses the Likert Scale. The Likert Scale is a 7 point scale to measure party identification, with Strong Democrat one one extreme and Strong Republican at the other. In between the two extremes are the classifications of "Lean Democrat/Republican" and Weak Democrat/Republican.

The Likert Scale:

Strong Democrat-Weak Democrat-Lean Democrat-Independent-Lean Republican-Weak Republican-Strong Republican

Although this seems like a way to measure the strength of party identification for voting purposes, it actually tends to have problems. According to the scale, a weak party supporter should normally vote with the party, but many time this is not the case. A "leaning" party supporter shows more loyalty to the party than that of a weak party supporter. Weak party supporters are more likely to stray from their party than someone who does not really declare a party identification and only tends to lean to one of the other based on the issues at hand.

Voting

Those people who identify with a party tend to vote for their party's candidate for various offices in high percentages. Those who consider themselves to be strong partisans, strong Democrats and strong Republicans respectively, tend to be the most faithful in voting for their party's nominee for office. In the case of voting for president, since the 1970s, party identification on voting behavior has been increasing significantly. By the late 1990s, party identification on voting behavior was at the highest level of any election since the 1950s. [Bartels, Larry M. "Partisanship and Voting Behavior 1952-1996" "American Journal of Political Science" 44 (2000): 35-50] When voting in congressional elections, the trend is similar. Strong party identifiers voted overwhelmingly for their party's nominee in the general election. It is important to note that each party respectively in certain elections, would have stronger voting behavior of their strongest party identifiers. For instance, in the years the Democrats dominated House and Senate elections in the 1970s and 1980's, it can be explained that their strong party identifiers were more loyal in voting for their party's nominee for Congress than the Republicans were. [Hershey, Marjorie Randon. Party Politics in America 12th ed. 2007: Longman Classics in Political Science. page 110-111]

The same level of voting behavior can also be applied to state and local levels. While straight ticket voting has declined among the general voting population, it is still prevalent in those who are strong Republicans and strong Democrats. [Hershey, Marjorie Randon. Party Politics in America 12th ed. 2007: Longman Classics in Political Science. page 110-111] According to Paul Allen Beck and colleagues, "the stronger an individual's party identification was, the more likely he or she was to vote a straight ticket." [Beck, Paul Allen, et al. "Patterns and Sources of Ticket Splitting in Subpresidential Voting" "American Political Science Review" 86 (1992): 916-928]

ee also

*"The Voter Decides"

References