Research Project: Affective Polarization and Democratic Attitudes
Loading...
Contributors
Funders
ID
EC.00178
Authors
Aytaç, Selim Erdem
Faculty Member
Publications
Why bother?: Rethinking participation in elections and protests
(Cambridge University Press, 2019) Aytaç, Selim Erdem; Stokes, Susan C.; Department of International Relations; Yes; College of Administrative Sciences and Economics
Why do vote-suppression efforts sometimes fail? Why does police repression of demonstrators sometimes turn localized protests into massive, national movements? How do politicians and activists manipulate people’s emotions to get them involved? The authors of Why Bother? offer a new theory of why people take part in collective action in politics, and test it in the contexts of voting and protesting. They develop the idea that just as there are costs of participation in politics, there are also costs of abstention - intrinsic and psychological but no less real. That abstention can be psychically costly helps explain real-world patterns that are anomalies for existing theories, such as that sometimes increases in costs of participation are followed by more participation, not less. The book draws on a wealth of survey data, interviews, and experimental results from a range of countries, including the United States, Britain, Brazil, Sweden, and Turkey.
When polarization meets backsliding: affective polarization and support for undemocratic practices in Turkey
(Taylor and Francis, 2026) Irmak, Seda; Aytaç, Selim Erdem; Karakoç, Büşra Söylemez; Department of International Relations; Yes; College of Administrative Sciences and Economics
While the corrosive effect of affective polarization on democratic norms is a major concern, existing research has largely overlooked its dynamics outside established democracies. This study addresses this gap by examining Turkey, a paradigmatic, highly polarized hybrid regime where democratic norms are actively contested. Drawing on original, nationally representative survey data from spring 2024, we investigate how affective polarization shapes citizens’ willingness to endorse concrete violations of electoral fairness and civil liberties, moving beyond abstract measures of democratic support. We find that higher levels of affective polarization are strongly associated with greater endorsement of undemocratic practices motivated by both out-party discrimination and in-party favouritism, though the association is somewhat stronger for the latter. This relationship holds among both government and opposition supporters, challenging the assumption that tolerance for such practices is unique to incumbent partisans. Contrary to recent evidence from Western democracies, we find no curvilinear relationship: affective polarization in Turkey consistently predicts greater tolerance of democratic violations. By analysing a case of sustained democratic backsliding, we extend debates on affective polarization beyond consolidated democracies, showing how it can create a permissive environment for illiberal practices and undermine citizen commitment to democratic norms.
The Polarised electorate: affective polarisation and electoral loyalty in Turkey's 2023 critical election
(2025) Aytaç, Selim Erdem; Karakoç, Büşra Söylemez; Irmak, Seda; Department of International Relations; Yes; College of Administrative Sciences and Economics
Contemporary politics face rising affective polarisation – hostility and distrust across partisan lines. This study examines the contours and consequences of polarisation in Turkey ahead of the 2023 general election. While Turkey ranks among the world’s most polarised societies, individual-level analyses remain scarce. Using nationally-representative survey data, we reveal significant variation in polarisation across party supporters, with notably high levels among incumbent AKP and pro-Kurdish HDP supporters. Polarisation increases with age, political interest, and social media use, while decreasing with education. Crucially, affective polarisation significantly bolstered AKP voter loyalty, likely contributing to the party’s electoral success despite severe economic and social challenges. These findings have important implications for understanding electoral accountability in polarised societies and affective polarisation’s role in democratic backsliding.
