LGBTQ Allies, Enemies, and Activists: Testing a Unifying Theory of Descriptive and Substantive Group Identity

When do group identities shape political attitudes and behavior? Despite a rich interdisciplinary literature on social identity, several of its insights are seldom applied to political science, leaving scholars vulnerable to incomplete or mistaken inferences about political behavior. I curate these insights to develop a unifying theory of Descriptive and Substantive Identity. Using the case of LGBTQ politics, where effects should be particularly difficult to detect, the results support the predictions: once activated, identity has important effects on political outcomes above and beyond standard predictors like partisanship, ideology, and race. Among LGBTQ respondents, and in a heavily Democratic sample, those who internalize their group membership were 6 points more likely to vote for Joe Biden. Among non-LGB people, strong feelings toward gays and lesbians—positive or negative—produce large differences in attitudes and behavior, as Allies were 8 points more likely to vote for Biden than were Enemies. Scholars should account for social context, strength of group attachment, and affect when analyzing political behavior. These insights have the potential to better explain when group memberships are consequential, and when minoritized groups are most likely to be politically successful.