What does this research mean for the field?

The literature on affective polarization is predominantly U.S.-centric and focused on psychological, media, and identity drivers using cross-sectional designs, highlighting a need for more comparative, longitudinal, and institutional research. Novelty: ClaimNovelty.SYNTHESIS. Consensus alignment: ConsensusAlignment.NEUTRAL.

What question did this study set out to answer?

To synthesize causal evidence and methodological patterns explaining the drivers of affective polarization across political science and communication literature from 2012 to 2025.

August 28, 2026European Political ScienceOpen Access

What drives affective polarization? A systematic literature review

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

To synthesize causal evidence and methodological patterns explaining the drivers of affective polarization across political science and communication literature from 2012 to 2025.
Conducted a PRISMA-consistent systematic literature review of N=135 peer-reviewed studies identified via Google Scholar and Scopus and filtered by SCImago Journal Rank indexing.
Coded studies across five driver categories (psychological, media/information, identity/group, institutional, and socioeconomic) and two outcome dimensions (horizontal citizen attitudes vs. vertical elite attitudes).
Assessed methodological identification strength across study designs, including cross-sectional, experimental, panel, and quasi-experimental frameworks.
Psychological drivers, media exposure/content, and identity processes dominate the literature, while institutional and socioeconomic factors remain comparatively understudied.
Cross-sectional designs account for the largest proportion of research (44.4%), followed by experimental studies (28.9%) and panel designs (20.0%), whereas quasi-experimental designs remain rare (3.0%).
Publication volume increased sharply after 2020, but few studies evaluate horizontal (citizen-level) and vertical (elite-level) polarization dynamics concurrently.

Discussion

No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.

Implication

Systematic review reveals psychological and media factors drive affective polarization across 135 studies, highlighting gaps in institutional and longitudinal evidence.

Cite This Study

Kogel et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a914622d15324a1df3a990f https://doi.org/10.1017/s1682098326100642

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Implication

Systematic review reveals psychological and media factors drive affective polarization across 135 studies, highlighting gaps in institutional and longitudinal evidence.

What drives affective polarization? A systematic literature review

Key Points

Discussion

Implication

Cite This Study

What drives affective polarization? A systematic literature review

Key Points

Discussion

Implication

Cite This Study

Also Consider

Also Consider