In the wake of the 2016 presidential election, America's partisan divide has become even more apparent, with more and more people feeling that they actively dislike members of the opposite party. In new research, Christopher McConnell, Yotam Margalit, Neil Malhotra and Matthew Levendusky find that this negativity also extends to work and other business relationships. Not only are people willing to accept less pay from an employer who shares their party affiliation, they are also more likely to buy from sellers who are similar

Levendusky, Matthew

Malhotra, Neil

Margalit, Yotam

McConnell, Christopher

LSE Research Online

How	America’s	politics	influence	how	we	do	businessand	who	we	want	to	work	forIn	the	wake	of	the	2016	presidential	election,	America’spartisan	divide	has	become	even	more	apparent,	with	moreand	more	people	feeling	that	they	actively	dislike	members	ofthe	opposite	party.	In	new	research,	Christopher	McConnell,Yotam	Margalit,	Neil	Malhotra	and	Matthew	Levenduskyfind	that	this	negativity	also	extends	to	work	and	other	businessrelationships.	Not	only	are	people	willing	to	accept	less	pay	from	an	employer	who	shares	their	party	affiliation,	theyare	also	more	likely	to	buy	from	sellers	who	are	similar.	After	the	bruising	and	contentious	2016	US	presidential	election	and	the	subsequent	controversies	of	PresidentDonald	Trump’s	first	year	in	office,	it’s	not	surprising	that	Americans’	evaluations	of	members	of	the	opposite	politicalparty	have	reached	an	all-time	low.	According	to	data	from	the	Pew	Research	Center,	45	percent	of	Republicans	and41	percent	of	Democrats	think	the	other	party	is	so	dangerous	that	it	is	a	threat	to	the	health	of	the	nation.	Thisanimus	has	spilled	over	into	everyday	social	life:	According	to	a	HuffPost/YouGov	poll,	nearly	half	of	Americans	havehad	an	argument	with	someone	(a	friend,	family	member,	coworker,	etc.)	about	the	last	Presidential	election.	Fiftyyears	ago	few	people	expressed	any	anger	when	asked	how	they	would	feel	if	their	child	married	someone	from	theother	party.	Today,	one-third	of	Democrats	and	nearly	half	of	Republicans	would	be	deeply	upset.	On	item	after	item,Americans	not	only	disagree	on	the	issues	but	also	increasingly	personally	dislike	those	from	the	other	party.This	is	a	phenomenon	scholars	call	affective	polarization.	Political	scientists	have	attributed	a	number	of	importantconsequences	to	the	increase	of	affective	polarization	in	the	United	States,	chief	among	them	increased	gridlock	anddysfunction	in	Washington,	DC.	But	much	less	is	known	about	whether	affective	polarization	changes	how	weinteract	outside	of	politics.	For	example,	do	these	partisan	sentiments	affect	economic	exchanges	betweenindividuals	from	opposing	parties?This	question	is	especially	timely	given	recent,	post-election	discussions	of	American	consumers	either	supporting	orboycotting	companies	for	their	association	with	the	opposing	party.	For	example,	the	group	Grab	Your	Wallet	hassuggested	that	people	boycott	several	companies	over	their	ties	to	the	Trump	administration,	including	L.L.	Bean	andMacy’s,	and	the	#DeleteUber	hashtag	spread	after	Uber	failed	to	support	New	York	taxi	drivers’	protest	of	theadministration’s	travel	ban.	Ivanka	Trump’s	brand	has	been	a	political	football	used	by	both	the	left	and	the	right.Most	recently,	Delta	Air	Lines	canceled	a	promotional	discount	for	NRA	members	in	the	wake	of	the	Parklandshooting,	reflecting	the	increasing	tendencies	of	companies	to	engage	with	the	current	political	climate.	Are	thesesimply	highly	publicized	but	isolated	incidents,	or	do	they	represent	a	broader	trend	of	partisanship	entering	theeconomic	lives	of	Americans?We	conducted	four	experiments	to	address	these	questions	by	exploring	the	role	of	partisanship	in	shaping	economicbehavior.	In	the	first	experiment,	a	field	study	carried	out	in	an	online	labor	market,	we	assessed	whether	individualsare	more	likely	to	demand	higher	wages	when	they	learn	that	their	boss’s	political	party	is	different	from	their	own.The	second	study	examined	whether	people	are	less	likely	to	purchase	a	heavily	discounted	gift	card	if	the	sellerwas	affiliated	with	the	other	party,	but	more	likely	to	do	so	if	the	seller	is	from	their	own	party;	the	third	studyreplicated	this	in	a	larger	online	marketplace.	In	our	fourth	study,	an	incentivized	survey,	we	offered	participants	theability	to	make	money,	but	we	told	them	that	we	would	also	make	a	donation	to	the	opposing	political	party.	Each	ofthese	experiments	allowed	us	to	assess	how	participants’	economic	choices	and	actions	are	shaped	by	their	partisancommitments.USApp – American Politics and Policy Blog: How America’s politics influence how we do business and who we want to work for Page 1 of 3		Date originally posted: 2018-05-11Permalink: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2018/05/11/how-americas-politics-influence-how-we-do-business-and-who-we-want-to-work-for/Blog homepage: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/All	four	experiments	offer	evidence	that	partisanship	influences	economic	behavior,	even	when	it	is	costly.	Forexample,	in	the	labor	market	experiment	people	were	willing	to	work	for	less	money	for	fellow	partisans;	this	effect	isas	large	as	the	effect	of	factors	like	relevant	employment	experience.	When	presented	with	a	purchasing	opportunity,consumers	were	almost	twice	as	likely	to	engage	in	a	transaction	when	their	partisanship	matched	the	seller’s.	In	oursurvey	experiment,	three-quarters	of	the	subjects	refused	a	higher	monetary	payment	to	avoid	helping	the	otherparty	—	in	other	words,	they	preferred	to	make	themselves	worse	off	so	that	they	would	not	benefit	the	other	party.Taken	together,	these	results	clearly	indicate	that	the	trends	we	highlighted	earlier	are	unlikely	to	be	isolatedincidents.	The	impact	of	party	attachments	on	economic	choices	is	likely	to	be	stronger	and	more	widespread	thangenerally	recognized.Photo	by	Cytonn	Photography	on	UnsplashHowever,	even	though	we	see	the	impact	of	partisanship	in	all	of	our	studies,	we	also	find	that	it	can	take	on	differentforms	in	different	contexts.	In	our	labor	market	experiment,	we	find	that	workers	are	generally	reluctant	to	chargemore	when	they	learned	the	company	owner	was	from	the	opposite	party:	while	they	offered	a	same-party	discount,they	largely	did	not	require	an	opposing-party	premium.	Similarly,	people	were	more	willing	to	engage	with	same-party	sellers	but	did	not	punish	opposite-party	sellers.	These	findings	mirror	other	recent	research	that	partisans,while	happy	to	encourage	preferential	treatment	for	co-partisans,	are	unwilling	to	sanction	harm	against	theopposition.	While	many	well-reported	examples	of	partisanship	involve	discriminatory	behavior	towards	theopposition,	we	find	that	in	ordinary	settings,	partisans	may	sometimes	hesitate	to	cross	the	line	into	hostile	behavior.One	reason	for	this	could	be	that	in	our	experiments,	people	had	no	previous	interactions	with	the	employer/seller,meaning	that	they	could	only	update	their	beliefs	more	positively.	We	may	have	found	different	results	if	people	wereinteracting	with	a	well-known	employer/seller.Our	results	highlight	another	point	about	partisanship	in	contemporary	society:	It	has	become	animportant	social	identity.	It	extends	beyond	particular	policy	beliefs	or	support	for	specific	politicians.	Our	findingsshow	that	people	evaluate	the	exact	same	transaction	differently	based	on	whether	the	other	party	is	a	Democrat	ora	Republican,	even	though	their	partisanship	ostensibly	provides	no	information	about	their	quality	as	an	employer	orseller.	(Other	studies	have	found	that	partisanship	shapes	how	people	judge	the	seriousness	of	criminal	acts,the	suitability	of	someone	for	a	merit	scholarship,	or	whether	they	would	want	to	date	someone.)	The	mechanismbehind	this	difference	remains	murky.	People	may	infer	characteristics	such	as	trustworthiness	based	onpartisanship,	or	may	simply	be	reacting	emotionally.	Either	explanation	would	fit	the	patterns	we	have	found	in	ourwork.	But	what	seems	clear	is	that	partisanship’s	power	is	not	limited	to	politics.USApp – American Politics and Policy Blog: How America’s politics influence how we do business and who we want to work for Page 2 of 3		Date originally posted: 2018-05-11Permalink: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2018/05/11/how-americas-politics-influence-how-we-do-business-and-who-we-want-to-work-for/Blog homepage: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/Our	results	show	that	we	should	be	for	paying	greater	attention	to	potential	discrimination	based	on	partisanaffiliation.	To	date,	few	social	norms	constrain	such	behavior,	and	because	social	media	makes	political	expressionincreasingly	visible,	it	is	now	common	to	know	the	partisan	attachments	of	those	around	us.	Our	analysis	suggeststhat	partisan-based	discrimination	may	occur	even	in	the	most	ordinary	economic	settings,	and	not	just	in	responseto	highly	publicized	campaigns.	As	such,	this	type	of	discrimination	should	be	the	subject	of	more	systematic	scrutiny—	not	only	from	scholars	but	also	from	businesspeople,	workers,	and	consumers.	Lastly,	our	study	raises	thepossibility	that	corporate	executives	who	inject	politics	into	their	businesses	can	boost	support	among	those	whoagree	with	them,	but	may	alienate	those	who	do	not.A	version	of	this	article	originally	appeared	in	the	Harvard	Business	Review	and	is	based	on	the	paper,	“TheEconomic	Consequences	of	Partisanship	in	a	Polarized	Era”	in	the	American	Journal	of	Political	Science.Please	read	our	comments	policy	before	commenting	Note:		This	article	gives	the	views	of	the	author,	and	not	the	position	of	USAPP–	American	Politics	and	Policy,	nor	ofthe	London	School	of	Economics.		Shortened	URL	for	this	post:	http://bit.ly/2KVuakQAbout	the	authorsChristopher	McConnell	–	Stanford	Graduate	School	of	BusinessChristopher	McConnell	is	a	PhD	student	at	the	Stanford	Graduate	School	of	Business.	He	studiesAmerican	politics	and	political	economy.	Yotam	Margalit	–	Tel	Aviv	UniversityYotam	Margalit	is	an	Associate	Professor	of	Political	Science	at	Tel	Aviv	University.	Hespecializes	in	the	fields	of	international	and	comparative	political	economy.	Much	of	hiswork	deals	with	the	political	consequences	of	globalization,	examining	how	its	economicand	cultural	effects	influence	electoral	politics	and	shape	mass	preferences	on	issuessuch	as	immigration,	trade,	and	welfare	spending.Neil	Malhotra	–	Stanford	Graduate	School	of	BusinessNeil	Malhotra	is	Edith	M.	Cornell	Professor	of	Political	Economy	in	the	Graduate	School	of	Business	atStanford	University.	He	also	holds	a	courtesy	appointment	in	the	Department	of	Political	Science.	Heserves	as	the	Louise	and	Claude	N.	Rosenbrg,	Jr.	Director	of	the	Center	for	Social	Innovation	at	theStanford	GSB.	He	has	authored	over	60	articles	on	numerous	topics	including	American	politics,political	behavior,	and	survey	methodology.Matthew	Levendusky	–	University	of	PennsylvaniaMatthew	Levendusky	is	currently	an	associate	professor	of	political	science	at	the	University	ofPennsylvania.	His	research	focuses	on	understanding	how	institutions	and	elites	influence	the	politicalbehavior	of	ordinary	citizens.	This	broad	question	is	taken	up	in	studies	of	mass	polarization,	voter	cuetaking,	the	impact	of	partisan	media	on	ordinary	voters,	and	a	variety	of	other	substantive	questions.USApp – American Politics and Policy Blog: How America’s politics influence how we do business and who we want to work for Page 3 of 3		Date originally posted: 2018-05-11Permalink: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2018/05/11/how-americas-politics-influence-how-we-do-business-and-who-we-want-to-work-for/Blog homepage: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/

How America's politics influence how we do business and who we want to work for

http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/90039/1/usappblog-2018-05-11-how-americas-politics-influence-how-we-do.pdf

How America's politics influence how we do business and who we want to work for

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

LSE Research Online