Intersectionality is widely recognized as one of the largest contributions to the study of race, gender, and class across the academy. However, the quantitative operationalization of intersectionality within political science is often unsatisfactory. I provide evidence that the Bayesian multilevel model is an accessible and flexible tool for understanding intersectional dynamics in political behavior. Using both a synthetic simulation and a real-world example with the American National Election Survey (ANES), I show how Bayesian multilevel models increase our inferential understanding of group-based heterogeneity in public opinion and political behavior. Conventional techniques, such as interaction terms, frequently yield estimates that are obscured by considerable noise, making it challenging to discern meaningful patterns. In contrast, the Bayesian multilevel model excels at revealing underlying patterns in small sample-size environments. In doing so, the model better captures the interwoven nature of race, gender, and class that often goes unnoticed in political science research.
AbromowitzA.2010. New Directions in American Political Parties. Routledge. Google-Books-ID: ZNuOAgAAQBAJ.
2.
AckerlyB.TrueJ.. 2010. “Back to the Future: Feminist Theory, Activism, and Doing Feminist Research in an Age of Globalization.” Women’s Studies International Forum33 (5): 464–72.
3.
Alexander-FloydN. G.2012. “Disappearing Acts: Reclaiming Intersectionality in the Social Sciences in a Post-Black Feminist Era.” Feminist Formations24 (1): 1–25.
4.
BarretoM. A.Frasure-YokleyL.VargasE. D.WongJ.. 2018. “Best Practices in Collecting Online Data with Asian, Black, Latino, and White Respondents: Evidence from the 2016 Collaborative Multiracial Post-election Survey.” Politics, Groups, and Identities5503: 1–10.
5.
BejaranoC. E.2014. “Latino Gender and Generation Gaps in Political Ideology.” Politics & Gender10 (01): 62–88.
6.
BellA.HolmanD.JonesK.. 2019. “Using Shrinkage in Multilevel Models to Understand Intersectionality.” Methodology15 (2): 88–96.
7.
BerelsonB.LazarsfeldP.McPheeW.. 1954. Voting: A Study of Opinion Formation in a Presidential Campaign. University of Chicago Press.
8.
BittnerA.Goodyear-GrantE.. 2017. “Sex Isn’t Gender: Reforming Concepts and Measurements in the Study of Public Opinion.” Political Behavior39 (4): 1019–41.
9.
BlockR.GolderM.GolderS. N.. 2023. “Evaluating Claims of Intersectionality.” The Journal of Politics; 000–000. Publisher: The University of Chicago Press.
BrownN. E.2012. “Negotiating the Insider/Outsider Status: Black Feminist Ethnography and Legislative Studies.” Journal of Feminist Scholarship3: 17.
12.
BrownN. E.2014. “Political Participation of Women of Color: An Intersectional Analysis.” Journal of Women, Politics & Policy35 (4): 315–48.
13.
BürknerP. C.2017. “Brms: An R Package for Bayesian Multilevel Models Using Stan.” Journal of Statistical Software80 (1).
14.
ChoS.CrenshawK. W.McCallL.. 2013. “Toward a Field of Intersectionality Studies: Theory, Applications, and Praxis.” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society38 (4): 785–810.
15.
ClarkM.2018. Bayesian Basics: A Conceptual Introduction with Application in R and Stan, Vol. 57. E-Pub.
16.
CollectiveC. R. (1974). The Combahee River Collective Statement. University of Pittsburgh Press.
17.
ConverseP. E.CampbellA.MillerW. E.StokesD. E.. 1961. “Stability and Change in 1960: a Reinstating Election.” American Political Science Review55 (2): 269–80.
18.
CrenshawK. W.1989. “Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine.” Chicago Legal140: 139–167.
19.
CrenshawK. W.1991. “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color.” Stanford Law Review43: 60.
20.
DavisK.2008. “Intersectionality as Buzzword.” Feminist Theory9: 67–85.
21.
DawsonM.1994. Behind the Mule: Race and Class in African American Politics. Princeton University Press.
22.
EvansC. R.WilliamsD. R.OnnelaJ.-p.SubramanianS. V.. 2018. “A Multi-Level Approach to Modeling Health Inequalities at the Intersection of Multiple Social Identities.” Social Science & Medicine203: 64–73.
23.
EvansC. R.LeckieG.MerloJ.. 2020. “Multilevel versus Single-Level Regression for the Analysis of Multilevel Information: The Case of Quantitative Intersectional Analysis.” Social Science & Medicine245: 112499.
24.
EvansC. R.BorrellL. N.BellA.HolmanD.SubramanianS. V.LeckieG.. 2024. “Clarifications on the Intersectional MAIHDA Approach: A Conceptual Guide and Response to Wilkes and Karimi (2024).” Social Science & Medicine350: 116898.
25.
Forman-RabinoviciA.MandelH.. 2023. “The Prevalence and Implications of Gender Blindness in Quantitative Political Science Research.” Politics & Gender19 (2): 482–506.
26.
Frasure-YokleyL.2018. “Choosing the Velvet Glove : Women Voters , Ambivalent Sexism , and Vote Choice in 2016.” The Journal of Race, Ethnicity, and Politics3: 1–23.
27.
García BedollaL.2007. “Intersections of Inequality: Understanding Marginalization and Privilege in the Post-Civil Rights Era.” Politics & Gender3 (02): 232–48.
28.
GelmanA.HillJ.. 2006. Data Analysis Using Regression and Multilevel Modeling. Cambridge Univeristy Press.
GershonS. A.MontoyaC.BejaranoC.BrownN.AllenS.MontoyaC.BejaranoC.BrownN.. 2019. “Intersectional Linked Fate and Political Representation.” Politics, Groups, and Identities7 (3): 642–53.
31.
HajnalZ. L.LeeT.. 2011. “Why Americans Don’t Join the Party: Race, Immigration, and the Failure (Of Political Parties) to Engage the Electorate.” In Why Americans Don’t Join the Party. Princeton University Press.
32.
HancockA.-M.2007a. “Intersectionality as a Normative and Empirical Paradigm.” Politics & Gender3 (2): 248.
33.
HancockA.-M.2007b. “When Multiplication Doesn’t Equal Quick Addition: Examining Intersectionality as a Research Paradigm.” Perspectives on Politics5 (1): 63–79.
34.
HancockA.-M.2019. “Empirical Intersectionality : A Tale of Two Approaches A Tale of Two Approaches.” In The Palgrave Handbook of Intersectionality in Public Policy, 95–132. Palgrave Macmillan.
35.
HawkesworthM.2003. “Congressional Enactments of Race–Gender: Toward a Theory of Raced–Gendered Institutions.” American Political Science Review97 (4): 529–50.
36.
Hesse-BiberS.LeavyP.. 2007. Feminist Research Practice. Sage Publications, Inc.
37.
JardinaA.2019. White Identity Politics. 1st ed.Cambridge University Press.
38.
JeffersonH. (2020). “The Curious Case of Black Conservatives: Construct Validity and the 7-point Liberal-Conservative Scale.” SSRN Electronic Journal.
39.
JohnsonA.OttM.DogucuM.. 2022. Bayes Rules! an Introduction to Applied Bayesian Modeling. Routledge.
40.
JohnstonR.JonesK.ManleyD.. 2018. “Age, Sex, Qualifications and Voting at Recent English General Elections: an Alternative Exploratory Approach.” Electoral Studies51: 24–37.
41.
JonesP. E.BrewerP. R.. 2020. “Elite Cues and Public Polarization on Trans-Gender Rights.” Politics, Groups, and Identities8 (1): 71–85.
42.
JonesK.JohnstonR.ManleyD.. 2016. “Uncovering Interactions in Multivariate Contingency Tables: a Multi-Level Modelling Exploratory Approach.” Methodological Innovations9: 2059799116672874.
43.
Jordan-ZacheryJ. S.2007. “Am I a Black Woman or a Woman Who Is Black ? A Few Thoughts on the Meaning of Intersectionality.” Politics & Gender3 (2): 254–63.
44.
JunnJ.2007. “Square Pegs and Round Holes: Challenges of Fitting Individual-Level Analysis to a Theory of Politicized Context of Gender.” Politics & Gender3 (1): 124–34.
45.
JunnJ.2017. “The Trump Majority: White Womanhood and the Making of Female Voters in the U.S.” Politics, Groups, and Identities5 (2): 343–52.
46.
JunnJ.MasuokaN.. 2008. “Asian American Identity: Shared Racial Status and Political Context.” Perspectives on Politics6 (4): 729–40.
47.
JunnJ.MasuokaN.. 2020. “The Gender Gap Is a Race Gap: Women Voters in US Presidential Elections.” Perspectives on Politics18 (4): 1135–45.
48.
KinderD. R.SandersL. M.SandersL. M.. 1996. Divided by Color: Racial Politics and Democratic Ideals. University of Chicago Press.
49.
KruschkeJ. K.AguinisH.JooH. (2012). “The Time Has Come: Bayesian Methods for Data Analysis in the Organizational Sciences.” Organizational Research Methods15: 722–52.
MaasC. J. M.HoxJ. J.. 2005. “Sufficient Sample Sizes for Multilevel Modeling.” Methodology1: 86–92.
53.
MallardI. G.2022. The Politics of Being Afro-Latino/Latina: Ethnicity, Colorism, and Political Representation in Washington, D.C. Rowman & Littlefield. Google-Books-ID: qeh9EAAAQBAJ.
54.
MasonL.2018. Uncivil Agreement: How Politics Became Our Identity. University of Chicago Press.
55.
MatosY.GreeneS.SanbonmatsuK.. 2023. “The Politics of “Women of Color”: a Group Identity Worth Investigating.” Politics, Groups, and Identities11 (3): 549–70.
56.
McCallL.2005. “The Complexity of Intersectionality.” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society30 (3): 1771–1800.
57.
McNeishD.2016. “On Using Bayesian Methods to Address Small Sample Problems.” Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal23 (5): 750–73.
58.
McNeishD.StapletonL.. 2016. “The Effect of Small Sample Size on Two Level Model Estimates: A Review and Illustration.” Educational Psychology Review28: 295–314.
59.
MerloJ.2018. “Multilevel Analysis of Individual Heterogeneity and Discriminatory Accuracy (MAIHDA) within an Intersectional Framework.” Social Science & Medicine203: 74–80.
60.
MontoyaC.2020. “Intersectionality and Voting Rights.” PS: Political Science & Politics53 (3): 484–89.
61.
NashJ.2018. Black Feminism Reimagined: After Intersectionality. Duke University Press.
62.
OjedaC.SlaughterC. M.. 2019. “Intersectionality, Depression, and Voter Turnout.” Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law44 (3): 480–504.
63.
PaccagnellaO.2011. “Sample Size and Accuracy of Estimates in Multilevel Models: New Simulation Results.” Methodology7 (3): 111–20.
64.
ParkJ.YuH.-T.. 2018. “Recommendations on the Sample Sizes for Multilevel Latent Class Models.” Educational and Psychological Measurement78 (5): 737–61.
65.
PérezE. O.2021. Diversity’s Child: People of Color and the Politics of Identity. University of Chicago Press. Google-Books-ID: EEU6EAAAQBAJ.
66.
PeughJ. L.2010. “A Practical Guide to Multilevel Modeling.” Journal of School Psychology48 (1): 85–112.
RuppA. A.DeyD. K.ZumboB. D.. 2004. “To Bayes or Not to Bayes, from whether to when: Applications of Bayesian Methodology to Modeling.” Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal11 (3): 424–51.
69.
SidesJ.TeslerM.VavreckL.. 2018. Identity Crisis: The 2016 Presidential Campaign and the Battle for the Meaning of America. Princeton University Press.
70.
SidesJ.TausanovitchC.VavreckL.. 2023. The Bitter End: The 2020 Presidential Campaign and the Challenge to American Democracy. Princeton University Press. Google-Books-ID: J2m1EAAAQBAJ.
71.
SimienE. M.2007. “Doing Intersectionality Research: From Conceptual Issues to Practical Examples.” Politics & Gender3 (2): 264–71.
72.
SmidS. C.McNeishD.MiočevićM.Van De SchootR.. 2020. “Bayesian versus Frequentist Estimation for Structural Equation Models in Small Sample Contexts: A Systematic Review.” Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal27 (1): 131–61.
73.
SmoothW.2011. “Standing for Women? Which Women? the Substantive Representation of Women’s Interests and the Research Imperative of Intersectionality.” Politics & Gender7 (3): 436–41.
74.
SpryA. D.2018. “Identity in American Politics: A Multidimensional Approach to Study and Measurement.” Columbia Academic Commons268.
75.
StaufferK. E.O’BrienD. Z.. 2018. “Quantitative Methods and Feminist Political Science.” In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. Oxford University Press.
TeslerM.2016. “Post-racial or Most-Racial? Race and Politics in the Obama Era.” In Post-racial or Most-Racial?University of Chicago Press.
78.
WassersteinR. L.LazarN. A.. 2016. “The ASA Statement on P -Values: Context, Process, and Purpose.” The American Statistician70 (2): 129–33.
79.
WassersteinR. L.SchirmA. L.LazarN. A.. 2019. “Moving to a World beyond “P \textless 0.05”.” The American Statistician73 (sup1): 1–19.
80.
WeldonS. L.2006. “The Structure of Intersectionality: A Comparative Politics of Gender.” Politics & Gender2 (02): 235.
81.
WhiteI. K.LairdC. N.. 2020. “Steadfast Democrats: How Social Forces Shape Black Political Behavior.” In Steadfast Democrats. Princeton University Press.
82.
WilkesR.KarimiA.. 2023. “What Does the MAIHDA Method Explain?” Social Science & Medicine345: 116495.
83.
ZyphurM. J.OswaldF. L.. 2015. “Bayesian Estimation and Inference: A User’s Guide.” Journal of Management41 (2): 390–420.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
