Liberal and conservative self-identification is largely symbolic rather than issue-based

Evidence

Although over the past few decades liberal/conservative self-identifications have often played a part in studies of belief systems, they have seldom been the focus of research. Recently, however, several studies have suggested that such identifications play a significant role in voting behavior and political perception. Implicit in this research, however, are two tenuous assumptions: that liberal/conservative identifications are bipolar in meaning and that underlying this bipolarity is cognitive meaning based on political issues. In this paper, we develop a model of ideological identifications that emphasizes their symbolic and nondimensional origins and nature. Based on the 1976 and 1978 National Election Studies, our empirical analysis reveals strong support for the model. Specifically, ideological identifications are found to have largely symbolic meanings, a fact that helps to explain some of the findings concerning the relationship of the liberal/conservative continuum to political perception and behavior. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 1983

Categorization

• QUESTION: How well has this symbolic/nondimensional model of ideological identification held up against later empirical work, and does it survive the era of hyper-issue-driven identity politics?
• XREF: Connects to the standing critique of the liberal/conservative continuum as a single dimension, anticipating modern work on social identity (‘us/them’) as the real driver of self-placement.
• SEED: Angle for an essay: if ideological labels are mostly symbols worn as identity badges rather than summaries of positions, then debates over ‘what a liberal even believes’ are category errors from the start.