Disclaimer. Don't rely on these old notes in lieu of reading the literature, but they can jog your memory. As a grad student long ago, my peers and I collaborated to write and exchange summaries of political science research. I posted them to a wiki-style website. "Wikisum" is now dead but archived here. I cannot vouch for these notes' accuracy, nor can I even say who wrote them. If you have more recent summaries to add to this collection, send them my way I guess. Sorry for the ads; they cover the costs of keeping this online.
Conover and Feldman. 1981. The origins and meaning of liberal/conservative self-identifications. American Journal of Political Science 25 (November): 617-.
Conservatives and liberals aren't just looking at different sides of the same coin; they're using completely different currencies. Loving conservatives doesn't require hating liberals--it's not bipolar. Rather, we base our evaluations of liberals and conservatives on affective evaluations of symbols (groups, ideas, maybe policies) associated with each group. For example, I evaluate liberals based on my feelings about NARAL, Martin Luther King, and peaceniks; I evaluate conservatives based on my feelings about the NRA, Iraq, and evangelicals. In fact, cognitive (issue-based) evaluations play second fiddle to these symbolic evaluations when I judge each side.
Since we judge liberals and conservatives by referencing different symbols, people's evaluations of liberals and conservatives are not necessarily negatively correlated.
Compare with Ansolaberehe and Iyengar's (1994) "issue ownership" argument.
Research by the same authors
Research on similar subjects