Pub Date : 2024-01-01DOI: 10.1177/20531680231225308
Haifeng Huang, Chanita Intawan, Stephen P. Nicholson
Authoritarian governments heavily rely on propaganda as a means of maintaining rule. Although scholars have examined the effects of propaganda exposure, much less is known about attitudes toward propaganda messages. In this study, we explore the foundations underlying propaganda support in China by examining the role of political trust, a primary ingredient for explaining public support for government actions and compliance. Using a survey with a broad sample of Chinese internet users and taking measures to address endogeneity, we found that trust in government, whether measured indirectly (implicitly) or directly (explicitly), is a vital source of positive attitudes toward propaganda and hence its potential effects. Our results have important implications for understanding the foundations of propaganda support, the scope of political trust, and the value of indirect measures for gauging public opinion in authoritarian contexts. They also suggest that propaganda may lose its bite under certain conditions.
{"title":"Political trust and public support for propaganda in China","authors":"Haifeng Huang, Chanita Intawan, Stephen P. Nicholson","doi":"10.1177/20531680231225308","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20531680231225308","url":null,"abstract":"Authoritarian governments heavily rely on propaganda as a means of maintaining rule. Although scholars have examined the effects of propaganda exposure, much less is known about attitudes toward propaganda messages. In this study, we explore the foundations underlying propaganda support in China by examining the role of political trust, a primary ingredient for explaining public support for government actions and compliance. Using a survey with a broad sample of Chinese internet users and taking measures to address endogeneity, we found that trust in government, whether measured indirectly (implicitly) or directly (explicitly), is a vital source of positive attitudes toward propaganda and hence its potential effects. Our results have important implications for understanding the foundations of propaganda support, the scope of political trust, and the value of indirect measures for gauging public opinion in authoritarian contexts. They also suggest that propaganda may lose its bite under certain conditions.","PeriodicalId":125693,"journal":{"name":"Research & Politics","volume":"63 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139639966","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-01-01DOI: 10.1177/20531680241240824
Alberto López Ortega
Negativity against LGBTQ+ and gender equality symbols is escalating across Western European countries, including those at the forefront of sexual modernism. Drawing on data from Spain, this paper theorizes and finds that state-sponsored LGBTQ+ symbols receive significantly more negativity than other aspects of LGBTQ+ issues related to general and specific attitudes toward formal rights. The negativity is primarily explained by support for Vox, a radical right-wing party, and age. The study provides insights into the complexities of public opinion surrounding LGBTQ+ symbols, offering a nuanced understanding of the challenges faced by the LGBTQ+ community in terms of acceptance and visibility. Furthermore, it highlights the influence of political affiliations and generational factors in shaping these attitudes.
{"title":"The war on flags: The opposition to state-sponsored LGBTQ+ symbols","authors":"Alberto López Ortega","doi":"10.1177/20531680241240824","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20531680241240824","url":null,"abstract":"Negativity against LGBTQ+ and gender equality symbols is escalating across Western European countries, including those at the forefront of sexual modernism. Drawing on data from Spain, this paper theorizes and finds that state-sponsored LGBTQ+ symbols receive significantly more negativity than other aspects of LGBTQ+ issues related to general and specific attitudes toward formal rights. The negativity is primarily explained by support for Vox, a radical right-wing party, and age. The study provides insights into the complexities of public opinion surrounding LGBTQ+ symbols, offering a nuanced understanding of the challenges faced by the LGBTQ+ community in terms of acceptance and visibility. Furthermore, it highlights the influence of political affiliations and generational factors in shaping these attitudes.","PeriodicalId":125693,"journal":{"name":"Research & Politics","volume":"32 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140522826","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-01-01DOI: 10.1177/20531680241233784
C. Steinert, David Weyrauch
The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is not only an unprecedented cross-continental infrastructure investment program, it is also a key pillar of China’s foreign policy. The Chinese government seeks to tie BRI member states closer to its political system and to enhance its soft power across the globe. Whether this has been successful has been analyzed for individual countries but, as of yet, there is a paucity of cross-national evidence on the geopolitical impact of the BRI. We collected a novel global dataset on bilateral cooperation agreements with China in the context of the BRI for all states across the globe. We rely on voting similarities in the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) to analyze whether the decision to join the BRI is linked to geopolitical alignment with China. We apply generalized synthetic control models and community detection algorithms to estimate the impact of BRI membership on voting similarity to China. Our findings show that the signature of BRI membership agreements had no discernible short-term impact on voting similarity to China in most regions of the world. The exception is Europe, where BRI membership induced a backlash against China. Our findings suggest that European states counter-balance to the US and signal their independence from China after signing a BRI agreement.
{"title":"Belt and road initiative membership and voting patterns in the United Nations General Assembly","authors":"C. Steinert, David Weyrauch","doi":"10.1177/20531680241233784","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20531680241233784","url":null,"abstract":"The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is not only an unprecedented cross-continental infrastructure investment program, it is also a key pillar of China’s foreign policy. The Chinese government seeks to tie BRI member states closer to its political system and to enhance its soft power across the globe. Whether this has been successful has been analyzed for individual countries but, as of yet, there is a paucity of cross-national evidence on the geopolitical impact of the BRI. We collected a novel global dataset on bilateral cooperation agreements with China in the context of the BRI for all states across the globe. We rely on voting similarities in the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) to analyze whether the decision to join the BRI is linked to geopolitical alignment with China. We apply generalized synthetic control models and community detection algorithms to estimate the impact of BRI membership on voting similarity to China. Our findings show that the signature of BRI membership agreements had no discernible short-term impact on voting similarity to China in most regions of the world. The exception is Europe, where BRI membership induced a backlash against China. Our findings suggest that European states counter-balance to the US and signal their independence from China after signing a BRI agreement.","PeriodicalId":125693,"journal":{"name":"Research & Politics","volume":"4 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140524821","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-01-01DOI: 10.1177/20531680241228358
Ka‐Ming Chan, Laura B Stephenson
As immigration issues waned in salience during the COVID-19 pandemic, populist radical right (PRR) parties repositioned themselves by politicizing various pandemic policies. In light of this changing political landscape, scholars have analyzed what factors are associated with PRR voting. Yet, most studies focus on small sets of covariates that could easily ignore other key determinants. To address this limitation, we use MI-LASSO logistic regression, which is a more inductive data-driven approach that can incorporate a huge number of covariates. Our research analyzes the key determinants of voting for the People’s Party of Canada—a PRR party that rose rapidly during the pandemic. Using the 2021 Canadian Election Study dataset ( N = 14,841), we confirm that PRR voters in the pandemic were both protest and policy-oriented voters. They were protest voters since anti-establishment attitudes consistently correlate with their vote choice. On the other hand, PRR voters’ policy concern was about pandemic policies rather than immigration, as nativist attitudes never emerge as key determinants. Additionally, we uncover that the ideological placement of the mainstream right party and the defense of hate speech are strong correlates, while conventional variables like sociodemographics are not. These findings enrich our understanding of PRR voting during the pandemic.
在 COVID-19 大流行期间，随着移民问题的重要性减弱，激进右翼民粹主义政党（PRR）通过将各种流行病政策政治化来重新定位自己。鉴于这种政治格局的变化，学者们分析了哪些因素与激进右翼政党的投票有关。然而，大多数研究都只关注一小部分协变量，很容易忽略其他关键决定因素。为了解决这一局限，我们采用了 MI-LASSO 逻辑回归，这是一种归纳性更强的数据驱动方法，可以纳入大量协变量。我们的研究分析了加拿大人民党（People's Party of Canada）--一个在大流行病期间迅速崛起的共和党--投票的关键决定因素。通过使用 2021 年加拿大选举研究数据集（N = 14,841），我们证实大流行病期间的人民革命党选民既是抗议选民，也是政策导向选民。他们是抗议选民，因为反建制态度与他们的投票选择始终相关。另一方面，PRR 选民的政策关注点是大流行病政策而非移民政策，因为本土主义态度从未成为关键的决定因素。此外，我们还发现，主流右翼政党的意识形态定位和对仇恨言论的辩护与他们的投票选择密切相关，而社会人口统计等传统变量则与之无关。这些发现丰富了我们对大流行病期间 PRR 投票的理解。
{"title":"Using MI-LASSO to study populist radical right voting in times of pandemic","authors":"Ka‐Ming Chan, Laura B Stephenson","doi":"10.1177/20531680241228358","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20531680241228358","url":null,"abstract":"As immigration issues waned in salience during the COVID-19 pandemic, populist radical right (PRR) parties repositioned themselves by politicizing various pandemic policies. In light of this changing political landscape, scholars have analyzed what factors are associated with PRR voting. Yet, most studies focus on small sets of covariates that could easily ignore other key determinants. To address this limitation, we use MI-LASSO logistic regression, which is a more inductive data-driven approach that can incorporate a huge number of covariates. Our research analyzes the key determinants of voting for the People’s Party of Canada—a PRR party that rose rapidly during the pandemic. Using the 2021 Canadian Election Study dataset ( N = 14,841), we confirm that PRR voters in the pandemic were both protest and policy-oriented voters. They were protest voters since anti-establishment attitudes consistently correlate with their vote choice. On the other hand, PRR voters’ policy concern was about pandemic policies rather than immigration, as nativist attitudes never emerge as key determinants. Additionally, we uncover that the ideological placement of the mainstream right party and the defense of hate speech are strong correlates, while conventional variables like sociodemographics are not. These findings enrich our understanding of PRR voting during the pandemic.","PeriodicalId":125693,"journal":{"name":"Research & Politics","volume":"312 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139635880","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-01-01DOI: 10.1177/20531680241228914
Toon Van Overbeke
As automation challenges labour markets across Europe, research in political science is pointing towards the socially corrosive link between such technological change and political dissatisfaction. In this paper, I extend this research agenda by looking at the relation between automation risk and incumbent support in 20 European countries between 2012 and 2018. I find strong support for the notion that workers with substantial exposure to automation risk are more likely to reject governments at the ballot box. Importantly, however, these findings indicate that this anti-incumbent voting is less prevalent among theoretically at-risk workers who enjoy some level of protection, in the form of permanent contracts, co-determination rights or higher educational attainment. As such, this paper argues that technological occupation risk should be seen as feeding into broader labour market risks faced by voters.
{"title":"It’s the robots, stupid? Automation risk, labour market resources and incumbent support in Europe","authors":"Toon Van Overbeke","doi":"10.1177/20531680241228914","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20531680241228914","url":null,"abstract":"As automation challenges labour markets across Europe, research in political science is pointing towards the socially corrosive link between such technological change and political dissatisfaction. In this paper, I extend this research agenda by looking at the relation between automation risk and incumbent support in 20 European countries between 2012 and 2018. I find strong support for the notion that workers with substantial exposure to automation risk are more likely to reject governments at the ballot box. Importantly, however, these findings indicate that this anti-incumbent voting is less prevalent among theoretically at-risk workers who enjoy some level of protection, in the form of permanent contracts, co-determination rights or higher educational attainment. As such, this paper argues that technological occupation risk should be seen as feeding into broader labour market risks faced by voters.","PeriodicalId":125693,"journal":{"name":"Research & Politics","volume":"33 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139633157","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-01-01DOI: 10.1177/20531680241234833
Chung-li Wu, Alex Min-Wei Lin
Do citizens reveal their valid preferences when asked about a potential foreign threat? This study presents the results of two list experiments implemented in Taiwan, a democratic and independently ruled island that leaders in China have long vowed to reunify with the mainland. Our two experiments—conducted in March 2019 and September 2021—focus on the percentage of Taiwanese who perceive China as a “friend” and those who regard China as an “enemy.” The findings reveal that, first, the proportion of Taiwanese citizens who harbored hostile feelings toward China grew by 30% points between the two dates. In comparison, those with a more friendly perception of China declined by 18% points. Second, we detected significant misreporting or preference falsification when comparing the list experiment estimates with answers to a direct question. Third, we found evidence that the hypothesized China-ambivalent respondents are most likely to have switched their perceptions of China.
{"title":"Ambivalence and perceptions of China: Two list experiments","authors":"Chung-li Wu, Alex Min-Wei Lin","doi":"10.1177/20531680241234833","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20531680241234833","url":null,"abstract":"Do citizens reveal their valid preferences when asked about a potential foreign threat? This study presents the results of two list experiments implemented in Taiwan, a democratic and independently ruled island that leaders in China have long vowed to reunify with the mainland. Our two experiments—conducted in March 2019 and September 2021—focus on the percentage of Taiwanese who perceive China as a “friend” and those who regard China as an “enemy.” The findings reveal that, first, the proportion of Taiwanese citizens who harbored hostile feelings toward China grew by 30% points between the two dates. In comparison, those with a more friendly perception of China declined by 18% points. Second, we detected significant misreporting or preference falsification when comparing the list experiment estimates with answers to a direct question. Third, we found evidence that the hypothesized China-ambivalent respondents are most likely to have switched their perceptions of China.","PeriodicalId":125693,"journal":{"name":"Research & Politics","volume":"32 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140526181","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-01-01DOI: 10.1177/20531680241236239
Michael Heseltine, Bernhard Clemm von Hohenberg
Large-scale text analysis has grown rapidly as a method in political science and beyond. To date, text-as-data methods rely on large volumes of human-annotated training examples, which place a premium on researcher resources. However, advances in large language models (LLMs) may make automated annotation increasingly viable. This paper tests the performance of GPT-4 across a range of scenarios relevant for analysis of political text. We compare GPT-4 coding with human expert coding of tweets and news articles across four variables (whether text is political, its negativity, its sentiment, and its ideology) and across four countries (the United States, Chile, Germany, and Italy). GPT-4 coding is highly accurate, especially for shorter texts such as tweets, correctly classifying texts up to 95% of the time. Performance drops for longer news articles, and very slightly for non-English text. We introduce a ‘hybrid’ coding approach, in which disagreements of multiple GPT-4 runs are adjudicated by a human expert, which boosts accuracy. Finally, we explore downstream effects, finding that transformer models trained on hand-coded or GPT-4-coded data yield almost identical outcomes. Our results suggest that LLM-assisted coding is a viable and cost-efficient approach, although consideration should be given to task complexity.
{"title":"Large language models as a substitute for human experts in annotating political text","authors":"Michael Heseltine, Bernhard Clemm von Hohenberg","doi":"10.1177/20531680241236239","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20531680241236239","url":null,"abstract":"Large-scale text analysis has grown rapidly as a method in political science and beyond. To date, text-as-data methods rely on large volumes of human-annotated training examples, which place a premium on researcher resources. However, advances in large language models (LLMs) may make automated annotation increasingly viable. This paper tests the performance of GPT-4 across a range of scenarios relevant for analysis of political text. We compare GPT-4 coding with human expert coding of tweets and news articles across four variables (whether text is political, its negativity, its sentiment, and its ideology) and across four countries (the United States, Chile, Germany, and Italy). GPT-4 coding is highly accurate, especially for shorter texts such as tweets, correctly classifying texts up to 95% of the time. Performance drops for longer news articles, and very slightly for non-English text. We introduce a ‘hybrid’ coding approach, in which disagreements of multiple GPT-4 runs are adjudicated by a human expert, which boosts accuracy. Finally, we explore downstream effects, finding that transformer models trained on hand-coded or GPT-4-coded data yield almost identical outcomes. Our results suggest that LLM-assisted coding is a viable and cost-efficient approach, although consideration should be given to task complexity.","PeriodicalId":125693,"journal":{"name":"Research & Politics","volume":"41 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140516062","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-01-01DOI: 10.1177/20531680241231468
Jonathan Mellon, J. Bailey, Ralph Scott, James Breckwoldt, Marta Miori, Phillip Schmedeman
Can artificial intelligence accurately label open-text survey responses? We compare the accuracy of six large language models (LLMs) using a few-shot approach, three supervised learning algorithms (SVM, DistilRoBERTa, and a neural network trained on BERT embeddings), and a second human coder on the task of categorizing “most important issue” responses from the British Election Study Internet Panel into 50 categories. For the scenario where a researcher lacks existing training data, the accuracy of the highest-performing LLM (Claude-1.3: 93.9%) neared human performance (94.7%) and exceeded the highest-performing supervised approach trained on 1000 randomly sampled cases (neural network: 93.5%). In a scenario where previous data has been labeled but a researcher wants to label novel text, the best LLM’s (Claude-1.3: 80.9%) few-shot performance is only slightly behind the human (88.6%) and exceeds the best supervised model trained on 576,000 cases (DistilRoBERTa: 77.8%). PaLM-2, Llama-2, and the SVM all performed substantially worse than the best LLMs and supervised models across all metrics and scenarios. Our results suggest that LLMs may allow for greater use of open-ended survey questions in the future.
{"title":"Do AIs know what the most important issue is? Using language models to code open-text social survey responses at scale","authors":"Jonathan Mellon, J. Bailey, Ralph Scott, James Breckwoldt, Marta Miori, Phillip Schmedeman","doi":"10.1177/20531680241231468","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20531680241231468","url":null,"abstract":"Can artificial intelligence accurately label open-text survey responses? We compare the accuracy of six large language models (LLMs) using a few-shot approach, three supervised learning algorithms (SVM, DistilRoBERTa, and a neural network trained on BERT embeddings), and a second human coder on the task of categorizing “most important issue” responses from the British Election Study Internet Panel into 50 categories. For the scenario where a researcher lacks existing training data, the accuracy of the highest-performing LLM (Claude-1.3: 93.9%) neared human performance (94.7%) and exceeded the highest-performing supervised approach trained on 1000 randomly sampled cases (neural network: 93.5%). In a scenario where previous data has been labeled but a researcher wants to label novel text, the best LLM’s (Claude-1.3: 80.9%) few-shot performance is only slightly behind the human (88.6%) and exceeds the best supervised model trained on 576,000 cases (DistilRoBERTa: 77.8%). PaLM-2, Llama-2, and the SVM all performed substantially worse than the best LLMs and supervised models across all metrics and scenarios. Our results suggest that LLMs may allow for greater use of open-ended survey questions in the future.","PeriodicalId":125693,"journal":{"name":"Research & Politics","volume":"214 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140521713","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-01DOI: 10.1177/20531680231209553
Mia Costa, Charles Crabtree, John B. Holbein, M. Landgrave
What do political scientists think about research ethics? What research practices do they find acceptable? Using a survey conducted with the American Political Science Association, we explore perceptions of ethics among 362 political scientists. We find that political scientists do not place much relative weight on ethics when evaluating research. We do, however, find that researchers view different modes of inquiry as having different potential harms. Furthermore, using a conjoint experiment, we find that factors like author affiliation, study location, method, and sample size shape evaluations of study ethicality. Our results contribute to the growing body of metascience by expanding understanding of ethics in political science research.
{"title":"Is that ethical? An exploration of political scientists’ views on research ethics","authors":"Mia Costa, Charles Crabtree, John B. Holbein, M. Landgrave","doi":"10.1177/20531680231209553","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20531680231209553","url":null,"abstract":"What do political scientists think about research ethics? What research practices do they find acceptable? Using a survey conducted with the American Political Science Association, we explore perceptions of ethics among 362 political scientists. We find that political scientists do not place much relative weight on ethics when evaluating research. We do, however, find that researchers view different modes of inquiry as having different potential harms. Furthermore, using a conjoint experiment, we find that factors like author affiliation, study location, method, and sample size shape evaluations of study ethicality. Our results contribute to the growing body of metascience by expanding understanding of ethics in political science research.","PeriodicalId":125693,"journal":{"name":"Research & Politics","volume":"225 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139328872","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-01DOI: 10.1177/20531680231223289
Lisa Blaydes, Justin Gengler
This paper explores the attitudes of expatriate workers towards the future of migration to the Arab Gulf states. We conduct an online survey and framing experiment administered to more than 2900 expatriate workers in Kuwait and Qatar. We find that Arab migrants are less supportive of future migration than other migrants and also exhibit high levels of ethnic-group bias in favor of fellow Arabs. Evidence from the framing experiment suggests that Arab migrants disfavor Indian workers, even though workers from South Asia are less likely to pose competition for jobs. Our findings provide empirical evidence for ethnic boundary policing within the migrant community and speak to the conditions that encourage anti-migrant sentiment and in-group favoritism among Arab expatriate workers in the Gulf region.
{"title":"Arab identity and attitudes toward migration in Kuwait and Qatar","authors":"Lisa Blaydes, Justin Gengler","doi":"10.1177/20531680231223289","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20531680231223289","url":null,"abstract":"This paper explores the attitudes of expatriate workers towards the future of migration to the Arab Gulf states. We conduct an online survey and framing experiment administered to more than 2900 expatriate workers in Kuwait and Qatar. We find that Arab migrants are less supportive of future migration than other migrants and also exhibit high levels of ethnic-group bias in favor of fellow Arabs. Evidence from the framing experiment suggests that Arab migrants disfavor Indian workers, even though workers from South Asia are less likely to pose competition for jobs. Our findings provide empirical evidence for ethnic boundary policing within the migrant community and speak to the conditions that encourage anti-migrant sentiment and in-group favoritism among Arab expatriate workers in the Gulf region.","PeriodicalId":125693,"journal":{"name":"Research & Politics","volume":"76 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139327746","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：