County-level political group density, partisan polarization, and individual-level mortality among adults in the United States: A lagged multilevel study
- PMID: 38813457
- PMCID: PMC11134911
- DOI: 10.1016/j.ssmph.2024.101662
County-level political group density, partisan polarization, and individual-level mortality among adults in the United States: A lagged multilevel study
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the associations between county-level political group density, partisan polarization, and individual-level mortality from all causes and from coronary heart disease (CHD) in the United States.
Methods: Using data from five survey waves (1998-2006) of the General Social Survey-National Death Index dataset and the County Presidential Election Return 2000 dataset, we fit weighted Cox proportional hazards models to estimate the associations between (1) political group density and (2) partisan polarization measured at the county level in 2000 (n = 313 counties) categorized into quartiles with individual-level mortality (n = 14,983 participants) from all causes and CHD, controlling for individual- and county-level factors. Maximum follow-up was from one year after the survey up until 2014. We conducted these analyses using two separate measures based on county-level vote share differences and party affiliation ideological extremes.
Results: In the overall sample, we found no evidence of associations between county-level political group density and individual-level mortality from all causes. There was evidence of a 13% higher risk of dying from heart disease in the highest quartile of county-level polarization (hazards ratio, HR = 1.13; 95% CI = 0.74-1.71). We observed heterogeneity of effects based on individual-level political affiliation. Among those identifying as Democrats, residing in counties with high (vs. low) levels of polarization appeared to be protective against mortality, with an associated 18% lower risk of dying from all causes (HR = 0.82, 95% CI = 0.71-0.94). This association was strongest in areas with the highest concentrations of Democrats.
Conclusions: Among all study participants, political group density and polarization at the county level in 2000 were not linked to individual-level mortality. At the same time, we found that Democratic party affiliation may be protective against the adverse effects of high polarization, particularly in counties with high concentrations of Democrats. Future research should further explore these associations to potentially identify new structural interventions to address political determinants of population health.
Keywords: Elections; Mortality; Partisanship; Polarization; Political determinants of health; Social determinants of health.
© 2024 The Authors.
Similar articles
-
County-level association of COVID-19 mortality with 2020 United States presidential voting.Public Health. 2021 Sep;198:114-117. doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2021.06.011. Epub 2021 Jun 23. Public Health. 2021. PMID: 34416573 Free PMC article.
-
Perceiving political polarization in the United States: party identity strength and attitude extremity exacerbate the perceived partisan divide.Perspect Psychol Sci. 2015 Mar;10(2):145-58. doi: 10.1177/1745691615569849. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2015. PMID: 25910386
-
Political environment and mortality rates in the United States, 2001-19: population based cross sectional analysis.BMJ. 2022 Jun 7;377:e069308. doi: 10.1136/bmj-2021-069308. BMJ. 2022. PMID: 35672032 Free PMC article.
-
Physical Inactivity and Obesity in the United States Through the Lens of the 2012 and 2016 Presidential Elections.Curr Probl Cardiol. 2024 Jan;49(1 Pt B):102068. doi: 10.1016/j.cpcardiol.2023.102068. Epub 2023 Sep 7. Curr Probl Cardiol. 2024. PMID: 37689376 Review.
-
Social Psychological Perspectives on Political Polarization: Insights and Implications for Climate Change.Perspect Psychol Sci. 2025 Jan;20(1):115-141. doi: 10.1177/17456916231186409. Epub 2023 Sep 18. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2025. PMID: 37722136 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Anxiety, depression, headaches - is political polarization bad for your health?Nat Med. 2024 Aug;30(8):2099-2102. doi: 10.1038/s41591-024-03136-x. Nat Med. 2024. PMID: 39060658 No abstract available.
-
Politicians, power, and the people's health: US elections and state health outcomes, 2012-2024.Health Aff Sch. 2024 Nov 27;2(12):qxae163. doi: 10.1093/haschl/qxae163. eCollection 2024 Dec. Health Aff Sch. 2024. PMID: 39664487 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Abramowitz A.I., Saunders K.L. Why can't we all just get along? The reality of a polarized America. The Forum. 2005;3(2) doi: 10.2202/1540-8884.1076. - DOI
-
- Abramowitz A.I., Saunders K.L. Is polarization a myth? The Journal of Politics. 2008;70(2):542–555. doi: 10.1017/S0022381608080493. - DOI
-
- Ahler D.J. Self-fulfilling misperceptions of public polarization. The Journal of Politics. 2014;76(3):607–620. doi: 10.1017/S0022381614000085. - DOI
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources