Ideological labels lack bipolar meaning, so evaluations drive self-identification rather than the reverse

Evidence

A critical element in this model is the specification of the relationship between ideological labels and self-identifications. Based on our earlier discussion, we argue that it is the evaluative meaning of ideological labels that is most closely related to self-placement. In effect, it is assumed that identification with an ideological label is associated with a positive evaluation of it. Having made this assumption, we are left with the difficult task of untangling the direction of causality in the relationship. In addressing this problem, two factors govern our thinking: the presumed lack of bipolarity in the meaning of ideological labels and our conceptualization of self-identification. A presumption of bipolarity is implicit in any causal model in which a single factor, such as ideological identification, is depicted as determining evaluations of both liberals and conservatives. In contrast, a causal ordering in which evaluations of ideological labels influence self-identification requires no assumption about bipolarity or its absence, and is thus consistent with our theoretical argument. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 2001

Thus, to this point several key findings have supported our argument that evaluations of liberals and conservatives are the most immediate determinants of ideological selfidentification. De spite this, in order for our interpretation to be fully convincing we must consider two major alternatives to our model, both of which seriously question the validity of our causal ordering of the evaluation of ideological labels and selfidentification. As illustrated in Figure 11.2, the first alternative, model 2, reverses our causal ordering so that self-identification is depicted as influencing evaluations rather than vice versa. Another alternative conceptualization is represented by model 3 which is based on the assumption that evaluations of both the “liberal” and “conservative” labels, as well as ideological self-placement, are simply multiple indicators of the same underlying construct, rather than measures of different constructs, as we have assumed. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 2039

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to social identity theory and the minimal group paradigm lineage — positive evaluation of an ingroup label driving identification.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 2001; John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 2039