Heterogeneity and Convergence in Cultural Logics of Americanness

Abstract

Recent scholarship suggests that polarization has inflamed political conflict over the boundaries of U.S. national membership. Our study offers an important caveat to this narrative. Using a novel empirical strategy that applies latent class modeling to conjoint data, we find that different segments of the American population use different cultural logics to sketch the contours of nationhood. However, these logics are not systematically patterned by partisanship: most Democrats, Republicans, and Independents articulate a vision of Americanness that fuses ethnocultural criteria with civic-oriented expectations for membership in America’s imagined community. Our findings complement and extend prior research by showing that different modes of measurement can yield credible evidence of both polarization and consensus. Whereas much of the existing literature relies on declarative measures of popular nationalism rooted in self-theorization, our design captures more intuitive judgments about national boundaries that are masked in traditional surveys. Consequently, our approach uncovers greater intraparty heterogeneity and interparty overlap than is often assumed, with two important implications. First, symbolic beliefs related to partisanship may be masking widely held ideas about nationhood embedded in public culture. Second, partisan debates may not only reflect competing nationalist logics, but contestation over who truly represents shared national values.