Responsiveness to Coethnics and Cominorities: Evidence from an Audit Experiment of State Legislators

Q1 Social Sciences Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics Pub Date : 2023-10-24 DOI:10.1017/rep.2023.30
Viviana Rivera-Burgos, Julia María Rubio
{"title":"Responsiveness to Coethnics and Cominorities: Evidence from an Audit Experiment of State Legislators","authors":"Viviana Rivera-Burgos, Julia María Rubio","doi":"10.1017/rep.2023.30","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract How do legislators respond to coethnic and cominority constituents? We conduct an audit study of all state legislators to explore white legislators’ responsiveness to different minority groups and minority group legislators’ responsiveness to each other. Black and Latino Americans currently make up about one-third of the overall U.S. population and an even larger share of some state populations. In light of this growing diversification of the American electorate, legislators may have incentives to appeal to a broad racial constituency. In our experiment, state legislators are randomly assigned to receive an email from a white, Black, or Latino constituent. Our findings suggest a lack of legislators’ discrimination, on average, against Black relative to white constituents. Instead, we find that all legislators, on average, respond more to both white and Black constituents relative to Latinos. The evidence suggests that Black legislators do not exhibit coethnic solidarity toward their Black constituents or cominority solidarity toward their Latino constituents; however, Latinos do exhibit coethnic and cominority solidarity (though there are too few Latino legislators to definitively establish this claim). We also estimate effects among white legislators by party and racial composition of districts in order to provide suggestive evidence for white legislators’ intrinsic vs. strategic motivations.","PeriodicalId":37190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics","volume":"51 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rep.2023.30","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract How do legislators respond to coethnic and cominority constituents? We conduct an audit study of all state legislators to explore white legislators’ responsiveness to different minority groups and minority group legislators’ responsiveness to each other. Black and Latino Americans currently make up about one-third of the overall U.S. population and an even larger share of some state populations. In light of this growing diversification of the American electorate, legislators may have incentives to appeal to a broad racial constituency. In our experiment, state legislators are randomly assigned to receive an email from a white, Black, or Latino constituent. Our findings suggest a lack of legislators’ discrimination, on average, against Black relative to white constituents. Instead, we find that all legislators, on average, respond more to both white and Black constituents relative to Latinos. The evidence suggests that Black legislators do not exhibit coethnic solidarity toward their Black constituents or cominority solidarity toward their Latino constituents; however, Latinos do exhibit coethnic and cominority solidarity (though there are too few Latino legislators to definitively establish this claim). We also estimate effects among white legislators by party and racial composition of districts in order to provide suggestive evidence for white legislators’ intrinsic vs. strategic motivations.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对少数民族和少数群体的反应:来自州立法人员审计实验的证据
摘要:立法者如何回应族裔和少数族裔选民?我们对所有州议员进行了审计研究,以探讨白人议员对不同少数族裔的回应以及少数族裔议员对彼此的回应。黑人和拉丁裔美国人目前约占美国总人口的三分之一,在某些州的人口中所占比例甚至更高。鉴于美国选民日益多样化,议员们可能有动机去吸引更广泛的种族选民。在我们的实验中,州议员被随机分配接收来自白人、黑人或拉丁裔选民的电子邮件。我们的研究结果表明,相对于白人选民,平均而言,立法者对黑人选民缺乏歧视。相反,我们发现,相对于拉丁裔选民,所有立法者平均对白人和黑人选民的回应都更多。证据表明,黑人立法者对黑人选民没有表现出同族团结,对拉丁裔选民也没有表现出少数民族团结;然而,拉丁美洲人确实表现出了同族和少数民族的团结(尽管拉丁裔立法者太少,无法明确确立这一主张)。我们还根据党派和种族组成估算了白人立法者的影响,以便为白人立法者的内在动机与战略动机提供暗示性证据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics
Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics Social Sciences-Anthropology
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
期刊最新文献
Responsiveness to Coethnics and Cominorities: Evidence from an Audit Experiment of State Legislators Introduction to the Final 2023 Issue The Advantage of Disadvantage: Costly Protest and Legislative Responsiveness By LaGina Gause, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2022 Counting the State: State Resistance and Federal Enumeration of Latinos 1930–1970 Anger, Fear, and the Racialization of News Media Coverage of Protest Activity
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1