Culture, Converse, and Constraint: Tracking Changes in European Beliefs

In recent years, public opinion across Western societies, including Europe, has increasingly been characterized by “heightened polarization over cultural issues” (Norris and Inglehart 2019, 87). This polarization narrative commonly describes two culturally distinct camps that have solidified their stances, creating sharper social divisions. Consequently, the boundaries of disagreement are said to have intensified, making compromise and mutual understanding harder to achieve.

Studies on polarization frequently focus on differences of opinion on specific issues among various groups, such as partisans, social classes, generations, or genders. However, it is worth questioning whether this approach sufficiently captures the phenomenon of increasing polarization as it tends to overlook polarization as “unity of direction” (Campbell 2006, 61). Baldassarri and Gelman (2008, 409) also emphasize that “people’s ideological distance and, thus, polarization depend not only on the level of radicalization of their opinions but also on the extent to which such opinions are correlated with each other”—a quality captured in Converse’s concept of constraint.

Notwithstanding such calls, the power or degree to which beliefs about individual issues are interconnected has only been marginally considered in the literature on polarization, let alone studies that explicitly examine changes in constraint. In light of this, the present paper aims to track the interconnectedness of beliefs. Using data from the European Social Survey, it investigates whether cultural beliefs have become more interlinked. Our findings indicate that European societies have indeed experienced such a shift, supporting the idea of growing societal polarization into ideological camps. Further analysis of the relative belief importance reveals that attitudes toward climate change and immigration are particularly central, suggesting that these issues are especially likely to serve as proxies for broader ideological orientations and act as “flashpoints” or “battlegrounds” in the currently assumed cultural conflict.