D.C. Trilling, M. van Klingeren & Y Tsfati (2016). Selective exposure, political polarization, and possible mediators: Evidence from the Netherlands. International Journal of Public Opinion Research.

Polarization meaningin Urdu

Firat, Rengin B. and Pascal Boyer. 2015. “Coalitional Affiliation as a Missing Link Between Ethnic Polarization and Well-being: An Empirical Test from the European Social Survey.” Social Science Research, Vol. 53, pg. 148-161.

On the other hand, a World Bank report shows that many countries in Europe and Central Asia (ECA) are witnessing significant political polarization. Increasing numbers of voters appear to be moving away from centrist positions, abandoning long-held political commitments, and losing faith in established parties and to some extent institutions… Many issues — including economic difficulties, ethnic rivalries, the refugee crisis, and geopolitical tensions — may be driving political polarization in ECA. The importance of each varies by country. There does appear to have been some shift across ECA away from traditional, more centrist political parties, as well as toward more populist political opinions, since the beginning of this century.

In modern microscope eyepieces, the field diaphragm either precedes the optical system or is located between the lens element groups, as illustrated in Figure 1. This figure presents cutaway diagrams of a Ramsden and Huygens eyepiece showing ray traces through the field lens, eye lens, and field diaphragm. The Ramsden eyepiece (illustrated on the right in Figure 1) has an optical system consisting of two plano-convex lenses having a fixed separation distance according to their focal lengths. The first lens is termed the field lens because it is closer to the plane where the intermediate image is formed in the microscope. The field diaphragm is located between the tube opening and the field lens in the Ramsden eyepiece design.

The field number of typical eyepieces varies between 6 and 28 millimeters and (in general) decreases with the magnification of the eyepiece. For example, an eyepiece having a magnification of 10x typically has a field number ranging between 16 and 18 millimeters, while a lower magnification eyepiece (5x) has a field number of about 20 millimeters. Presented in Figure 2 is a comparison between the view fields available with similar eyepieces, one having a field number of 20 and the other a field number of 26. Note the greater range of specimen features visible through the eyepiece having the larger field number.

Abramowitz, Alan I. 2015. Partisan Nation: The Rise of Affective Polarization in the American Electorate. In John Green, Daniel Coffey and David Cohen, eds., The State of the Parties: The Changing Role of Contemporary American Parties, 7th edition. New York: Rowman and Littlefield.

Sep 23, 2021 — Rare earth elements (REEs) are crucial ingredients for a range of energy and information technologies. They are an indispensable part of strong ...

According to Palonen, polarization solves the initial problem of fragmentation, lack of unity, by instituting a frontier that sustains two communities as a bipolar hegemony. It requires constant rearticulation and, therefore, constant antagonism on that frontier… “Similar to the one-party system or consensus, polarization and bipolar hegemony bracket out less important demands and maintain an illusion of unity, rejecting anything that might shake internal cohesion,” she underlines.

Samuel Handlin, State Crisis in Fragile Democracies: Polarization and Political Regimes in South America. Cambridge University Press, 2017.

Yang, JungHwan & Rojas, Hernando & Wojcieszak, Magdalena & Aalberg, Toril & Coen, Sharon & James, Curran & Hayashi, Kaori & Iyengar, Shanto & Jones, Paul & Mazzoleni, Gianpietro & Papathanassopoulos, Stylianos & Rhee, June & Rowe, David & Soroka, Stuart & Tiffen, Rodney. (2016). Why Are “Others” So Polarized? Perceived Political Polarization and Media Use in 10 Countries. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 10.1111/jcc4.12166.

Wojcieszak, Magdalena & Garrett, R. Kelly. (2018). Social Identity, Selective Exposure, and Affective Polarization: How Priming National Identity Shapes Attitudes Toward Immigrants Via News Selection. Human Communication Research. 44. 10.1093/hcr/hqx010.

Jennifer McCoy & Murat Somer, Special Issue on Polarization and Democracy: A Janus-faced Relationship with Pernicious Consequences, American Behavioral Scientist, 62:1, January 2018.

Federico Vegetti, Zoltán Fazekas and Zsombor Méder. “Sorting your way out: perceived party posi- tions, political knowledge, and polarization.” 2017 Acta Politica, 52(4), 479–501.

Political polarization, according to an article by Emilia Palonen, is a political tool — articulated to demarcate frontiers between ‘us’ and ‘them’ and to stake out communities perceived as moral orders. Palonen writes that “polarization is a situation in which two groups create each other through demarcation of the frontier between them. The dominant political frontier creates a point of identification and confrontation in the political system, where consensus is found only within the political camps themselves.”

Polarizationexamples

Handlin says highly polarizing party systems in South America emerged through a mechanism of ‘polarizing populism,’ distinguished by two characteristics: i) Populist figures and movements emerged to challenge for, and often win, executive power. ii) These populist figures not only politicized a pro-systemic/anti-systemic dimension of politics, but they also advanced radical programmatic agendas greatly at odds with those of status quo opponents.

Abramowitz, Alan I. 2007. Don’t Blame Primary Voters for Polarization. The Forum: A Journal of Applied Research in Contemporary Politics, Issue 4, Article 4.

In most cases, the eyepiece field diaphragm opening diameter determines the view field size. The field size in the specimen plane is then defined as the field number divided by the magnification of the objective:

If an auxiliary lens is inserted between the objective and eyepiece, the magnification factor of this lens should also be employed in the equation by multiplication with the objective magnification (prior to the division operation). Although the field number is usually limited by the magnification and field diaphragm (stop) size of the eyepiece, there is clearly a limit that is also imposed by the design of the objective lens system. In early microscope objectives, the maximum usable field diameter tended to be about 18 millimeters or considerably less, but with modern plan apochromats and other specialized flat-field objectives, the maximum usable field can sometimes exceed 28 millimeters.

Abramowitz, Alan I. 2013. Voting in a Time of Polarization: Why Barack Obama Won the 2012 Presidential Election and What It Means. In Larry J. Sabato, ed., Barack Obama and the New America: The 2012 Election and the Changing Face of Politics. New York: Rowman and Littlefield.

USED PIXELINK PL-B778F Industrial Camera TESTED Fast shipping#DHL or FedEx. Pre-Owned. C $459.10. or Best Offer. +C $48.69 shipping. from Hong Kong.

Abramowitz, Alan I. 2014. Long-Term Trends and Short-Term Forecasts: The Transformation of U.S. Presidential Elections in an Age of Polarization. PS: Political Science and Politics: 47, April: 289-292.

Polarization meaningPolitics

Impact of Customizability Technology on Political Polarization — Dylko, Ivan; Dolgov, Igor; Hoffman, William; Eckhart, Nicholas; Molina, Maria; Aaziz, Omar; Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 02 January 2018, Vol.15(1), pp.19-33.

Mass polarization or popular polarization occurs when an electorate’s attitudes towards political issues, policies, and celebrated figures are neatly divided along party lines. At the extreme, each camp questions the moral legitimacy of the other, viewing the opposing camp and its policies as an existential threat to their way of life or the nation as a whole. Many political scientists consider political polarization a top-down process, in which elite polarization leads to — or at least precedes — popular polarization.

In the political rhetoric identities, symbols and history carry different meanings for the two poles. According to Palonen, the two camps of the bipolar hegemony sustain themselves through their opposition to one another rather than through their content. Polarization can be seen as a system of dual consensus, reproducing the typical problems of consensus. “Usually, but not exclusively, populism is attributed to small radical parties, which often rally on nationhood and anti-elitism, and are very successful in using media in order to put their message through,” says Palonen.

Press-party parallelism and polarization of news media during an election campaign: The case of the 2011 Turkish elections — A Çarkoğlu, L Baruh, K Yıldırım, The International Journal of Press/Politics, 2014, 19 (3), 295-317.

The size of the eyepiece field diaphragm opening is also dependent upon the correction for off-axial aberrations (coma, astigmatism, and lateral chromatic) of the objective. Recent eyepieces feature highly corrected glass that enables wide-field designs having field numbers of 26 millimeters and greater.

Nonetheless, once a surface type has been established, the Sa and Sq parameters may be used to indicate significant deviations in the texture characteristics.

Suiter, Jane & Fletcher, Richard. (2020). Polarization and partisanship: Key drivers of distrust in media old and new?. European Journal of Communication. 026732312090368. 10.1177/0267323120903685.

The Huygens eyepiece, illustrated on the left in Figure 1, is designed with the field lens positioned before the intermediate image plane, which coincides with the field diaphragm. Unlike the Ramsden eyepiece, the Huygens design has a focal point (at the intermediate image plane) residing between the eye and field lenses. In this case, the eye lens acts as a loupe to magnify the intermediate image.

Crafted from robust CNC aluminum, this bracket is not only durable but also lightweight, ensuring it doesn't add unnecessary bulk to your motorcycle. The ...

Schmuck, D., Heiss, R., & Matthes, J. (2020). Drifting further apart? How exposure to media portrayals of Muslims affects attitude polarization. Political Psychology.

Castanho Silva, Bruno. (2017). Populist radical right parties and mass polarization in the Netherlands. European Political Science Review. 10. 1-26. 10.1017/S1755773917000066.

Abramowitz, Alan I. 2015. How Race and Religion Have Polarized American Voters. In Daniel J. Hopkins and John Sides, eds., Political Polarization in American Politics. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.

Murat Somer and Jennifer McCoy, “Introduction: Déjà vu? Polarization and Endangered Democracies in the 21st Century” in Special Issue on Polarization and Democracy: A Janus-faced Relationship with Pernicious Consequences, American Behavioral Scientist, 62:1, (January 2018): 3-15.

Abramowitz, Alan I. 2012. American Political Parties in an Age of Polarization. In Mark D. Brewer and L. Sandy Maisel, eds., The Parties Respond: Changes in American Parties and Campaigns, 5th edition. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Wojcieszak, M. (2015). Political Polarization. In G. Mazzoleni (Ed.) International Encyclopedia of Political Communication. ICA Wiley-Blackwell International Encyclopedia. London: Wiley-Blackwell.

Yang, J., Rojas, H., Wojcieszak, M., et al. (2016). Why are “others” so polarized? Perceived political polarization and media use in 10 countries. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 21(5), 349- 367.

Get the best deals on Focal Telephoto Camera Lenses when you shop the largest online selection at eBay.com. Free shipping on many items | Browse your ...

Alban Lauka, Jennifer McCoy and Rengin B. Firat. “Mass Partisan Polarization: Measuring a Relational Concept” in Special Issue on Polarization and Democracy: A Janus-faced Relationship with Pernicious Consequences, American Behavioral Scientist, 62:1 (January 2018): 107-126.

Tucker, Joshua & Guess, Andrew & Barbera, Pablo & Vaccari, Cristian & Siegel, Alexandra & Sanovich, Sergey & Stukal, Denis & Nyhan, Brendan. (2018). Social Media, Political Polarization, and Political Disinformation: A Review of the Scientific Literature. SSRN Electronic Journal. 10.2139/ssrn.3144139.

According to an article by Samuel Handlin, extremely polarized politics in countries such as Bolivia, Ecuador and Venezuela emerged through a mechanism termed polarizing populism, in which political outsiders leveraged popular anti-systemic appeals to underwrite otherwise risky and highly controversial policy programs. The occurrence (or not) of polarizing populism in South America, in turn, can be explained by the conjunction of state crises before the left turn period and the strength of the extant infrastructure of left-wing political mobilization each country possessed as the post–Cold War era began, which shaped incentives for outsiders to build ideologically narrow or broad elite coalitions.

Gulbrandsen, Trygve Jens & Hoffmann-Lange, Ursula (2007). Consensus or polarization? Business and Labour Elites in Germany and Norway, In Fredrik Engelstad & Trygve Jens Gulbrandsen (ed.), Comparative Studies of Social and Political Elites. Elsevier. ISBN 978-0-7623-1379-2.

J. Tucker, A. Guess, P. Barbera, C. Vaccari, A. Siegel, S. Sanovich, D. Stukal, B. Nyhan (2018). Social Media, Political Polarization, and Political Disinformation: A Review of the Scientific Literature, commissioned by the Hewlett Foundation.

Tucker, J., Guess, A., Barberá, P., Vaccari, C., Siegel, A., Sanovich, S., Stukal, D. & Nyhan, B. “Social Media, Political Polarization, and Political Disinformation: A Review of the Scientific Literature”, Report prepared for the Hewle Foundation, 2018.

Barberá, P. “Social Media, Echo Chambers, and Political Polarization”, forthcoming. Social Media and Democracy: The State of the Field, edited by Nate Persily and Joshua Tucker. Cambridge University Press.

Abramowitz, Alan I. 2012. Grand Old Tea Party: Partisan Polarization and the Rise of the Tea Party Movement. In Lawrence Rosenthal and Christine Trost, eds., Steep: The Precipitous Rise of the Tea Party. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Meanwhile, a central claim of Hadlin’s article is that polarizing populism is enabled by state crises. State crises refer to situations characterized by two necessary elements: i) States perform poorly: Basic institutions such as the public administration, the judiciary, and the police prove inefficient and highly corrupt in their conduct and provision of goods and services. ii) Citizens come to possess very little confidence in these basic state institutions and government in general.  However, polarizing populism required not just state crisis but also contextual conditions that induced outsiders to build elite coalitions on the left. The proesses by which populist outsiders build movements, especially the coalitions and alliances they forge, therefore become critical in determining whether populists will adopt pragmatic or polarizing positions, and therefore whether or not they will transform party systems in highly polarizing directions.

Abramowitz, Alan I. and Walter J. Stone. 2006. The Bush Effect: Polarization, Turnout, and Activism in the 2004 Presidential Election. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 36: 141-154.

polarization中文

Webster, Steven W., and Alan I. Abramowitz. 2017. The Ideological Foundations of Affective Polarization in the U.S. Electorate. American Politics Research 45: 621- 647.

Palonen says that in polarization there is no middle ground. One has to choose sides. The political opponent is turned into an enemy, with an illegitimate and threatening position. Polarization also requires consensus on both sides of the main frontier, there is little space for diversity. Political polarization produces strong leaders due to the lack of contestation from within the party or coalition. They in turn secure their position by strengthening the polarization. This has been the main rhetorical strategy of Viktor Orban, a key populist politician in post-Communist Hungary, the leader of the Fidesz party.

Jennifer McCoy, Tahmina Rahman, and Murat Somer. “Polarization and the Global Crisis of Democracy: Common Patterns, Dynamics and Pernicious Consequences for Democratic Polities” in Special Issue on Polarization and Democracy: A Janus-faced Relationship with Pernicious Consequences, American Behavioral Scientist, 62:1 (January 2018): 16-42.

Nikon offers a range of eyepiece options featuring magnification and field of view combinations tailored towards a variety of applications.

Political polarization can refer to the divergence of political attitudes to ideological extremes. Almost all discussions of polarization in political science consider polarization in the context of political parties and democratic systems of government. In most two-party systems, political polarization embodies the tension of its binary political ideologies and partisan identities.

Dynamics of Polarization in the Greek Case — Andreadis, Ioannis; Stavrakakis, Yannis; Mccoy, Jennifer (Editor); Somer, Murat (Editor); The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, January 2019, Vol.681(1), pp.157-172.

Political elites and immigration in Italy: party competition, polarization and new cleavages — D Di Mauro, L Verzichelli, Contemporary Italian Politics, 2019, 1-14.

The diameter of the field in an optical microscope is expressed by the field-of-view number, or simply the field number, which is the diameter of the view field in millimeters measured at the intermediate image plane.

« Back to Glossary IndexPolitical Polarization Political polarization can refer to the divergence of political attitudes to ideological extremes. Almost all discussions of polarization in political science consider polarization in the context of political parties and democratic systems of government. In most two-party systems, political polarization embodies the tension of its binary political ideologies and partisan identities. Mass polarization or popular polarization occurs when an electorate’s attitudes towards political issues, policies, and celebrated figures are neatly divided along party lines. At the extreme, each camp questions the moral legitimacy of the other, viewing the opposing camp and its policies as an existential threat to their way of life or the nation as a whole. Many political scientists consider political polarization a top-down process, in which elite polarization leads to — or at least precedes — popular polarization. Political polarization, according to an article by Emilia Palonen, is a political tool — articulated to demarcate frontiers between ‘us’ and ‘them’ and to stake out communities perceived as moral orders. Palonen writes that “polarization is a situation in which two groups create each other through demarcation of the frontier between them. The dominant political frontier creates a point of identification and confrontation in the political system, where consensus is found only within the political camps themselves.” Polarization is reproduced in all political and social contexts with an intensity that distinguishes it from mere two-party politics, according to Palonen who says “It is a totalizing system, as it aims to dominate the existing systems of differences and identities. Similar logic can be found in other polarized contexts, such as those in the USA or Italy. The situation constitutes a problem for democracy insofar as democracy is seen as the articulation, combination and promotion of political values, demands and preferences that direct policies and seek to find a ground beyond the political elites, not mere regular elections.” Palonen says that in polarization there is no middle ground. One has to choose sides. The political opponent is turned into an enemy, with an illegitimate and threatening position. Polarization also requires consensus on both sides of the main frontier, there is little space for diversity. Political polarization produces strong leaders due to the lack of contestation from within the party or coalition. They in turn secure their position by strengthening the polarization. This has been the main rhetorical strategy of Viktor Orban, a key populist politician in post-Communist Hungary, the leader of the Fidesz party. In the political rhetoric identities, symbols and history carry different meanings for the two poles. According to Palonen, the two camps of the bipolar hegemony sustain themselves through their opposition to one another rather than through their content. Polarization can be seen as a system of dual consensus, reproducing the typical problems of consensus. “Usually, but not exclusively, populism is attributed to small radical parties, which often rally on nationhood and anti-elitism, and are very successful in using media in order to put their message through,” says Palonen. “Alternatively, one of the main parties is seen as a populist. In Hungary there are two,” reminds Palonen and adds that “Populism is a hegemonic formation. They profess black-and-white rhetoric on the people and the elite, the tendential empty stances on values and policies and a stark confrontation with the political adversary. Post-Communist politics in Hungary are politics of a bipolar hegemony and competing populism. A ‘hegemonic formation’ fixes a maximum amount of meanings together or blocks them out of it. In the political rhetoric identities, symbols and history carry meanings for the two poles. The two camps of the bipolar hegemony sustain themselves through their opposition to one another rather than through their content. Polarization can be seen as a system of dual consensus, reproducing the typical problems of consensus.” According to Palonen, polarization solves the initial problem of fragmentation, lack of unity, by instituting a frontier that sustains two communities as a bipolar hegemony. It requires constant rearticulation and, therefore, constant antagonism on that frontier… “Similar to the one-party system or consensus, polarization and bipolar hegemony bracket out less important demands and maintain an illusion of unity, rejecting anything that might shake internal cohesion,” she underlines.  On the other hand, a World Bank report shows that many countries in Europe and Central Asia (ECA) are witnessing significant political polarization. Increasing numbers of voters appear to be moving away from centrist positions, abandoning long-held political commitments, and losing faith in established parties and to some extent institutions… Many issues — including economic difficulties, ethnic rivalries, the refugee crisis, and geopolitical tensions — may be driving political polarization in ECA. The importance of each varies by country. There does appear to have been some shift across ECA away from traditional, more centrist political parties, as well as toward more populist political opinions, since the beginning of this century. According to an article by Samuel Handlin, extremely polarized politics in countries such as Bolivia, Ecuador and Venezuela emerged through a mechanism termed polarizing populism, in which political outsiders leveraged popular anti-systemic appeals to underwrite otherwise risky and highly controversial policy programs. The occurrence (or not) of polarizing populism in South America, in turn, can be explained by the conjunction of state crises before the left turn period and the strength of the extant infrastructure of left-wing political mobilization each country possessed as the post–Cold War era began, which shaped incentives for outsiders to build ideologically narrow or broad elite coalitions. Handlin says highly polarizing party systems in South America emerged through a mechanism of ‘polarizing populism,’ distinguished by two characteristics: i) Populist figures and movements emerged to challenge for, and often win, executive power. ii) These populist figures not only politicized a pro-systemic/anti-systemic dimension of politics, but they also advanced radical programmatic agendas greatly at odds with those of status quo opponents. Meanwhile, a central claim of Hadlin’s article is that polarizing populism is enabled by state crises. State crises refer to situations characterized by two necessary elements: i) States perform poorly: Basic institutions such as the public administration, the judiciary, and the police prove inefficient and highly corrupt in their conduct and provision of goods and services. ii) Citizens come to possess very little confidence in these basic state institutions and government in general.  However, polarizing populism required not just state crisis but also contextual conditions that induced outsiders to build elite coalitions on the left. The proesses by which populist outsiders build movements, especially the coalitions and alliances they forge, therefore become critical in determining whether populists will adopt pragmatic or polarizing positions, and therefore whether or not they will transform party systems in highly polarizing directions. Read More Jennifer McCoy & Murat Somer, Special Issue on Polarization and Democracy: A Janus-faced Relationship with Pernicious Consequences, American Behavioral Scientist, 62:1, January 2018. Webster, Steven W., and Alan I. Abramowitz. 2017. The Ideological Foundations of Affective Polarization in the U.S. Electorate. American Politics Research 45: 621- 647. Alan Abramowitz and Jennifer McCoy, “United States: Racial Resentment, Negative Partisanship and Polarization in Trump’s America,” in Annals of American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 681:1(January 2019): 137-156.  Abramowitz, Alan I. 2010. The Disappearing Center: Engaged Citizens, Polarization and American Democracy. New Haven: Yale University Press. Jennifer McCoy and Murat Somer, “Toward a Theory of Pernicious Polarization and How it Harms Democracy: Comparative Evidence and Possible Remedies,” in Annals of American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 681, no. 1 (January 2019): 234-271. Abramowitz, Alan I. 2014. Long-Term Trends and Short-Term Forecasts: The Transformation of U.S. Presidential Elections in an Age of Polarization. PS: Political Science and Politics: 47, April: 289-292. Abramowitz, Alan I. I. 2010. Transformation and Polarization: The 2008 Presidential Election and the New American Electorate. Electoral Studies, 29: 594-603. Abramowitz, Alan I., and Kyle L. Saunders. 2008. Is Polarization a Myth? Journal of Politics, 70: 542-555. Abramowitz, Alan I. 2007. Don’t Blame Primary Voters for Polarization. The Forum: A Journal of Applied Research in Contemporary Politics, Issue 4, Article 4. Abramowitz, Alan I. and Walter J. Stone. 2006. The Bush Effect: Polarization, Turnout, and Activism in the 2004 Presidential Election. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 36: 141-154. Abramowitz, Alan I. 2017. It Wasn’t the Economy, Stupid: Racial Polarization, White Racial Resentment, and the Rise of Trump. In Larry Sabato, Kyle Kondik and Geoff Skelley, eds., Trumped: The 2016 Election that Broke All the Rules. New York: Rowman and Littlefield. Abramowitz, Alan I. 2015. The New American Electorate: Partisan, Sorted and Polarized. In James Thurber, ed., American Gridlock: The Sources, Character and Impact of Political Polarization. New York: Cambridge University Press. Abramowitz, Alan I. 2015. How Race and Religion Have Polarized American Voters. In Daniel J. Hopkins and John Sides, eds., Political Polarization in American Politics. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Abramowitz, Alan I. 2015. Partisan Nation: The Rise of Affective Polarization in the American Electorate. In John Green, Daniel Coffey and David Cohen, eds., The State of the Parties: The Changing Role of Contemporary American Parties, 7th edition. New York: Rowman and Littlefield. Abramowitz, Alan I. 2013. Voting in a Time of Polarization: Why Barack Obama Won the 2012 Presidential Election and What It Means. In Larry J. Sabato, ed., Barack Obama and the New America: The 2012 Election and the Changing Face of Politics. New York: Rowman and Littlefield. Abramowitz, Alan I. 2012. Grand Old Tea Party: Partisan Polarization and the Rise of the Tea Party Movement. In Lawrence Rosenthal and Christine Trost, eds., Steep: The Precipitous Rise of the Tea Party. Berkeley: University of California Press. Abramowitz, Alan I. 2012. American Political Parties in an Age of Polarization. In Mark D. Brewer and L. Sandy Maisel, eds., The Parties Respond: Changes in American Parties and Campaigns, 5th edition. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Abramowitz, Alan I. 2011. U.S. Senate Elections in an Age of Polarization. In Burdett Loomis, ed., The U.S. Senate: From Delay to Dysfunction, Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press. Abramowitz, Alan I., and Kyle L. Saunders. 1997. Party Polarization and Ideological Realignment in the U.S. Electorate, 1976-1994. In L. Sandy Maisel, ed., The Parties Respond, 3rd edition. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press. Stone, Walter J., Ronald B. Rapoport and Alan I. Abramowitz. 1990. The Reagan Revolution and Party Polarization in the 1980s. In L. Sandy Maisel, ed., The Parties Respond: Changes in the American Party System. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press. Manuel Anselmi, Populism, social polarization and hybrid regimes: the case of Venezuela. In: Flaminia Saccà. Globalization and Socio-political New trends. (2016) p. 89-103, ROMA: Eurilink Edizioni Srl, ISBN:978-88-97931-81-2 Barberá, P. “Social Media, Echo Chambers, and Political Polarization”, forthcoming. Social Media and Democracy: The State of the Field, edited by Nate Persily and Joshua Tucker. Cambridge University Press. Tucker, J., Guess, A., Barberá, P., Vaccari, C., Siegel, A., Sanovich, S., Stukal, D. & Nyhan, B. “Social Media, Political Polarization, and Political Disinformation: A Review of the Scientific Literature”, Report prepared for the Hewle Foundation, 2018. Castanho Silva, Bruno. (2017). Populist radical right parties and mass polarization in the Netherlands. European Political Science Review. 10. 1-26. 10.1017/S1755773917000066. Polarization and partisanship: Key drivers of distrust in media old and new? — J Suiter, R Fletcher; European Journal of Communication, 0267323120903685 “Populist polarization and the slow death of democracy in Ecuador”, Carlos de la Torre, Andrés Ortiz,. Democratization, 23 (2) 2016, 221-241, DOI:10.1080/13510347.2015.1058784 Firat, Rengin B. and Pascal Boyer. 2015. “Coalitional Affiliation as a Missing Link Between Ethnic Polarization and Well-being: An Empirical Test from the European Social Survey.” Social Science Research, Vol. 53, pg. 148-161. Impact of Customizability Technology on Political Polarization — Dylko, Ivan; Dolgov, Igor; Hoffman, William; Eckhart, Nicholas; Molina, Maria; Aaziz, Omar; Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 02 January 2018, Vol.15(1), pp.19-33. Gulbrandsen, Trygve Jens & Hoffmann-Lange, Ursula (2007). Consensus or polarization? Business and Labour Elites in Germany and Norway, In Fredrik Engelstad & Trygve Jens Gulbrandsen (ed.), Comparative Studies of Social and Political Elites. Elsevier. ISBN 978-0-7623-1379-2. Samuel Handlin, State Crisis in Fragile Democracies: Polarization and Political Regimes in South America. Cambridge University Press, 2017. Somer, Murat, and Jennifer McCoy. “Transformations through Polarizations and Global Threats to Democracy.” The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 681, no. 1 (January, 2019): 8–22.  “The Logic of Polarizing Populism: State Crises and Polarization in South America,” Samuel Handlin, American Behavioral Scientist, 2018. Special issue on Polarization and Democracy. Murat Somer and Jennifer McCoy, “Introduction: Déjà vu? Polarization and Endangered Democracies in the 21st Century” in Special Issue on Polarization and Democracy: A Janus-faced Relationship with Pernicious Consequences, American Behavioral Scientist, 62:1, (January 2018): 3-15. Jennifer McCoy, Tahmina Rahman, and Murat Somer. “Polarization and the Global Crisis of Democracy: Common Patterns, Dynamics and Pernicious Consequences for Democratic Polities” in Special Issue on Polarization and Democracy: A Janus-faced Relationship with Pernicious Consequences, American Behavioral Scientist, 62:1 (January 2018): 16-42. Alban Lauka, Jennifer McCoy and Rengin B. Firat. “Mass Partisan Polarization: Measuring a Relational Concept” in Special Issue on Polarization and Democracy: A Janus-faced Relationship with Pernicious Consequences, American Behavioral Scientist, 62:1 (January 2018): 107-126. Where populist citizens get the news: An investigation of news audience polarization along populist attitudes in 11 countries — A Schulz; Communication Monographs, 2019, 86 (1), 88-111. Schmuck, D., Heiss, R., & Matthes, J. (2020). Drifting further apart? How exposure to media portrayals of Muslims affects attitude polarization. Political Psychology. Dynamics of Polarization in the Greek Case — Andreadis, Ioannis; Stavrakakis, Yannis; Mccoy, Jennifer (Editor); Somer, Murat (Editor); The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, January 2019, Vol.681(1), pp.157-172. Suiter, Jane & Fletcher, Richard. (2020). Polarization and partisanship: Key drivers of distrust in media old and new?. European Journal of Communication. 026732312090368. 10.1177/0267323120903685. Tucker, Joshua & Guess, Andrew & Barbera, Pablo & Vaccari, Cristian & Siegel, Alexandra & Sanovich, Sergey & Stukal, Denis & Nyhan, Brendan. (2018). Social Media, Political Polarization, and Political Disinformation: A Review of the Scientific Literature. SSRN Electronic Journal. 10.2139/ssrn.3144139. Jensen, C. & J.P.F. Thomsen (2011). “Can Party Competition Amplify Mass Ideological Polarization over Public Policy? The Case of Ethnic Exclusionism in Denmark and Sweden, Party Politics, 19(5): 821–840. P. Barberá, C. Vaccari, A. Valeriani (2017). ‘Social Media, Personalization of News Reporting, and Media Systems’ Polarization in Europe’. In M. Barisione, A. Michailidou (Eds), Social Media and European Politics: Rethinking Power and Legitimacy in the Digital Era. London: Palgrave Macmillan, ISBN: 978-1-137-59889-9, pp. 25-52. J. Tucker, A. Guess, P. Barbera, C. Vaccari, A. Siegel, S. Sanovich, D. Stukal, B. Nyhan (2018). Social Media, Political Polarization, and Political Disinformation: A Review of the Scientific Literature, commissioned by the Hewlett Foundation. Hameleers, M., & van der Meer, G. L. A. (2020). Misinformation and polarization in a high-choice media environment: How effective are political fact-checkers? Communication Research, 47, 227-250. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650218819671 D.C. Trilling, M. van Klingeren & Y Tsfati (2016). Selective exposure, political polarization, and possible mediators: Evidence from the Netherlands. International Journal of Public Opinion Research.  Federico Vegetti, Zoltán Fazekas and Zsombor Méder. “Sorting your way out: perceived party posi- tions, political knowledge, and polarization.” 2017 Acta Politica, 52(4), 479–501. Political elites and immigration in Italy: party competition, polarization and new cleavages — D Di Mauro, L Verzichelli, Contemporary Italian Politics, 2019, 1-14. Wojcieszak, Magdalena & Winter, Stephan & Yu, Xudong. (2020). Social Norms and Selectivity: Effects of Norms of Open-Mindedness on Content Selection and Affective Polarization. Mass Communication and Society. 10.1080/15205436.2020.1714663. Wojcieszak, Magdalena & Garrett, R. Kelly. (2018). Social Identity, Selective Exposure, and Affective Polarization: How Priming National Identity Shapes Attitudes Toward Immigrants Via News Selection. Human Communication Research. 44. 10.1093/hcr/hqx010. Yang, JungHwan & Rojas, Hernando & Wojcieszak, Magdalena & Aalberg, Toril & Coen, Sharon & James, Curran & Hayashi, Kaori & Iyengar, Shanto & Jones, Paul & Mazzoleni, Gianpietro & Papathanassopoulos, Stylianos & Rhee, June & Rowe, David & Soroka, Stuart & Tiffen, Rodney. (2016). Why Are “Others” So Polarized? Perceived Political Polarization and Media Use in 10 Countries. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 10.1111/jcc4.12166. Yang, J., Rojas, H., Wojcieszak, M., et al. (2016). Why are “others” so polarized? Perceived political polarization and media use in 10 countries. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 21(5), 349- 367. Wojcieszak, M. (2011). Deliberation and Attitude Polarization. Journal of Communication 61, 596–617. Wojcieszak, M. (2015). Political Polarization. In G. Mazzoleni (Ed.) International Encyclopedia of Political Communication. ICA Wiley-Blackwell International Encyclopedia. London: Wiley-Blackwell. Press-party parallelism and polarization of news media during an election campaign: The case of the 2011 Turkish elections — A Çarkoğlu, L Baruh, K Yıldırım, The International Journal of Press/Politics, 2014, 19 (3), 295-317. Press-party parallelism and polarization of news media during an election campaign: The case of the 2011 Turkish elections — A Çarkoğlu, L Baruh, K Yıldırım, The International Journal of Press/Politics, 2014, 19 (3), 295-317. Related Articles: QAnon: A Conspiracy Cult or Quasi-Religion of Modern Times?Prof. Pappas: We need creative leaders with realistic agendas against populismReligious Populism, Cyberspace and Digital Authoritarianism in Asia: India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Pakistan, and TurkeyCivilizationist Populism in South Asia: Turning India SaffronCivilizational Populism Around the WorldRelated Terms:Term: Populist Radical RightTerm: Social MediaTerm: PopulismTerm: MediaTerm: The PeopleTerm: The EliteTerm: OutsidersTerm: Status Quo

Polarization and partisanship: Key drivers of distrust in media old and new? — J Suiter, R Fletcher; European Journal of Communication, 0267323120903685

Polarizationcharacteristics

Wojcieszak, Magdalena & Winter, Stephan & Yu, Xudong. (2020). Social Norms and Selectivity: Effects of Norms of Open-Mindedness on Content Selection and Affective Polarization. Mass Communication and Society. 10.1080/15205436.2020.1714663.

Polarizationdefinition in Chemistry

P. Barberá, C. Vaccari, A. Valeriani (2017). ‘Social Media, Personalization of News Reporting, and Media Systems’ Polarization in Europe’. In M. Barisione, A. Michailidou (Eds), Social Media and European Politics: Rethinking Power and Legitimacy in the Digital Era. London: Palgrave Macmillan, ISBN: 978-1-137-59889-9, pp. 25-52.

Abramowitz, Alan I. 2010. The Disappearing Center: Engaged Citizens, Polarization and American Democracy. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Manuel Anselmi, Populism, social polarization and hybrid regimes: the case of Venezuela. In: Flaminia Saccà. Globalization and Socio-political New trends. (2016) p. 89-103, ROMA: Eurilink Edizioni Srl, ISBN:978-88-97931-81-2

Somer, Murat, and Jennifer McCoy. “Transformations through Polarizations and Global Threats to Democracy.” The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 681, no. 1 (January, 2019): 8–22.

Abramowitz, Alan I. 2017. It Wasn’t the Economy, Stupid: Racial Polarization, White Racial Resentment, and the Rise of Trump. In Larry Sabato, Kyle Kondik and Geoff Skelley, eds., Trumped: The 2016 Election that Broke All the Rules. New York: Rowman and Littlefield.

Abramowitz, Alan I. 2015. The New American Electorate: Partisan, Sorted and Polarized. In James Thurber, ed., American Gridlock: The Sources, Character and Impact of Political Polarization. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Hameleers, M., & van der Meer, G. L. A. (2020). Misinformation and polarization in a high-choice media environment: How effective are political fact-checkers? Communication Research, 47, 227-250. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650218819671

Press-party parallelism and polarization of news media during an election campaign: The case of the 2011 Turkish elections — A Çarkoğlu, L Baruh, K Yıldırım, The International Journal of Press/Politics, 2014, 19 (3), 295-317.

Michael W. Davidson - National High Magnetic Field Laboratory, 1800 East Paul Dirac Dr., The Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida, 32310.

Jennifer McCoy and Murat Somer, “Toward a Theory of Pernicious Polarization and How it Harms Democracy: Comparative Evidence and Possible Remedies,” in Annals of American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 681, no. 1 (January 2019): 234-271.

Abramowitz, Alan I., and Kyle L. Saunders. 1997. Party Polarization and Ideological Realignment in the U.S. Electorate, 1976-1994. In L. Sandy Maisel, ed., The Parties Respond, 3rd edition. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.

Abramowitz, Alan I. I. 2010. Transformation and Polarization: The 2008 Presidential Election and the New American Electorate. Electoral Studies, 29: 594-603.

The purpose of an eyepiece is to magnify the focal plane of the telescope. All telescopes form what is known as a real image at their focal ...

Polarizationsynonym

half waveplate · quarter waveplate. optical lens. optical lens. achromatic ... regeneration. This wavelength also benefits from the higher transmission ...

Where populist citizens get the news: An investigation of news audience polarization along populist attitudes in 11 countries — A Schulz; Communication Monographs, 2019, 86 (1), 88-111.

Jensen, C. & J.P.F. Thomsen (2011). “Can Party Competition Amplify Mass Ideological Polarization over Public Policy? The Case of Ethnic Exclusionism in Denmark and Sweden, Party Politics, 19(5): 821–840.

Alan Abramowitz and Jennifer McCoy, “United States: Racial Resentment, Negative Partisanship and Polarization in Trump’s America,” in Annals of American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 681:1(January 2019): 137-156.

AWP Gel knee pads are specifically designed to reduce fatigue and provide protection while you work. The bonded gel/foam padding delivers all-day comfort while ...

Polarization is reproduced in all political and social contexts with an intensity that distinguishes it from mere two-party politics, according to Palonen who says “It is a totalizing system, as it aims to dominate the existing systems of differences and identities. Similar logic can be found in other polarized contexts, such as those in the USA or Italy. The situation constitutes a problem for democracy insofar as democracy is seen as the articulation, combination and promotion of political values, demands and preferences that direct policies and seek to find a ground beyond the political elites, not mere regular elections.”

Polarizationin a sentence

“The Logic of Polarizing Populism: State Crises and Polarization in South America,” Samuel Handlin, American Behavioral Scientist, 2018. Special issue on Polarization and Democracy.

Knight Optical offers a range of stock and custom precision Fresnel Lenses made from PMMA Acrylic in two grade for fast global delivery ...

Stone, Walter J., Ronald B. Rapoport and Alan I. Abramowitz. 1990. The Reagan Revolution and Party Polarization in the 1980s. In L. Sandy Maisel, ed., The Parties Respond: Changes in the American Party System. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.

Abramowitz, Alan I. 2011. U.S. Senate Elections in an Age of Polarization. In Burdett Loomis, ed., The U.S. Senate: From Delay to Dysfunction, Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.

In all modern eyepiece designs, the field lens is placed a sufficient distance away from the intermediate image plane to ensure that dust or other surface debris and defects on the lens surface are not visualized along with the specimen. The top lens in both eyepiece designs is referred to as the eye lens because it is closest to the eye of the observer.

“Populist polarization and the slow death of democracy in Ecuador”, Carlos de la Torre, Andrés Ortiz,. Democratization, 23 (2) 2016, 221-241, DOI:10.1080/13510347.2015.1058784

A Delaval · 2024 — Chromosomal aberrations and early mortality in a non-mammalian vertebrate: example from pressure-induced triploid Atlantic salmon. Aurélien ...

“Alternatively, one of the main parties is seen as a populist. In Hungary there are two,” reminds Palonen and adds that “Populism is a hegemonic formation. They profess black-and-white rhetoric on the people and the elite, the tendential empty stances on values and policies and a stark confrontation with the political adversary. Post-Communist politics in Hungary are politics of a bipolar hegemony and competing populism. A ‘hegemonic formation’ fixes a maximum amount of meanings together or blocks them out of it. In the political rhetoric identities, symbols and history carry meanings for the two poles. The two camps of the bipolar hegemony sustain themselves through their opposition to one another rather than through their content. Polarization can be seen as a system of dual consensus, reproducing the typical problems of consensus.”