Democratic Norms, Social Projection, and False Consensus in the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election

IF 1.9 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE Journal of Political Marketing Pub Date : 2021-07-01 DOI:10.1080/15377857.2021.1939568
Aaron C. Weinschenk, Costas Panagopoulos, S. van der Linden
{"title":"Democratic Norms, Social Projection, and False Consensus in the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election","authors":"Aaron C. Weinschenk, Costas Panagopoulos, S. van der Linden","doi":"10.1080/15377857.2021.1939568","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract We examine individuals’ views about democratic norm violations related to the peaceful transfer of power and acceptance of election results and the link between those views and broader perceptions about support for social election norms in the American public. Using data from an original national survey fielded after the 2020 presidential election, a number of important findings emerge. First, sizable majorities of Americans personally support the peaceful transfer of power (89%) and accept the 2020 presidential election results (74%). Second, individuals perceive these social norms to be widely held by the public. Respondents believe that 67% of Americans support a peaceful transfer of power and that 63% of Americans will accept the results of the 2020 election. Third, there is a strong link between personal views about these election norms and social perceptions about election norms. Consistent with research in psychology on the false consensus bias, people expect the public at large to share their views about election norms. Finally, we demonstrate that political ideology moderates the relationship between personal views about election norms and public perceptions about these norms. Among conservatives who do not support the election outcome, the perception is that only a small portion of the general public supports the election. On the other hand, among conservatives who do support election norms, the perception is that a large share of the public shares their views.","PeriodicalId":46259,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Political Marketing","volume":"20 1","pages":"255 - 268"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15377857.2021.1939568","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Political Marketing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15377857.2021.1939568","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Abstract We examine individuals’ views about democratic norm violations related to the peaceful transfer of power and acceptance of election results and the link between those views and broader perceptions about support for social election norms in the American public. Using data from an original national survey fielded after the 2020 presidential election, a number of important findings emerge. First, sizable majorities of Americans personally support the peaceful transfer of power (89%) and accept the 2020 presidential election results (74%). Second, individuals perceive these social norms to be widely held by the public. Respondents believe that 67% of Americans support a peaceful transfer of power and that 63% of Americans will accept the results of the 2020 election. Third, there is a strong link between personal views about these election norms and social perceptions about election norms. Consistent with research in psychology on the false consensus bias, people expect the public at large to share their views about election norms. Finally, we demonstrate that political ideology moderates the relationship between personal views about election norms and public perceptions about these norms. Among conservatives who do not support the election outcome, the perception is that only a small portion of the general public supports the election. On the other hand, among conservatives who do support election norms, the perception is that a large share of the public shares their views.
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
2020年美国总统大选中的民主规范、社会投射和虚假共识
摘要我们研究了个人对与和平移交权力和接受选举结果有关的违反民主规范的看法,以及这些看法与美国公众对支持社会选举规范的更广泛看法之间的联系。利用2020年总统大选后进行的一项原始全国调查的数据,出现了一些重要的发现。首先,相当多的美国人个人支持和平移交权力(89%),并接受2020年总统选举结果(74%)。其次,个人认为这些社会规范被公众广泛持有。受访者认为,67%的美国人支持和平移交权力,63%的美国人会接受2020年大选的结果。第三,个人对这些选举规范的看法与社会对选举规范的认知之间存在着强烈的联系。与心理学对虚假共识偏见的研究一致,人们希望广大公众分享他们对选举规范的看法。最后,我们证明了政治意识形态调节了个人对选举规范的看法与公众对这些规范的看法之间的关系。在不支持选举结果的保守派中,人们认为只有一小部分公众支持选举。另一方面,在支持选举规范的保守派中,人们认为很大一部分公众认同他们的观点。
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 Political Marketing
Journal of Political Marketing POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
8.30%
发文量
15
期刊介绍: The Journal of Political Marketing aims to be the leading scholarly journal examining the latest developments in the application of marketing methods to politics. As the political world becomes more complex and interwoven, it is imperative for all interested parties to stay abreast of “cutting edge” tools that are used in unique and different ways in countries around the world. The journal goes beyond the application of advertising to politics to study various strategic marketing tools such as: Voter segmentation Candidate positioning Use of multivariate statistical modeling to better understand the thinking and choices made by voters.
期刊最新文献
Democratic Malaise: A Proposed Theoretical Conceptualization for Marketing Malaise The Influences of Political Strategies and Communication Styles on Political Candidates’ Online and Offline Visibility Follow the Leader: Examining the Use of Heuristics in Political Social Media Advertising During the 2019 UK General Election Political Campaign Professionalization in Lithuanian Elections Professionalization of Campaign Communication beyond Communication Forms. An Analysis of Poland’s Political Spots
×
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