{"title":"Nathan P. Kalmoe and Lilliana Mason. Radical American Partisanship: Mapping Violent Hostility, Its Causes, and the Consequences for Democracy","authors":"Laura Jakli","doi":"10.1093/poq/nfac054","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfac054","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51359,"journal":{"name":"Public Opinion Quarterly","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2023-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46571773","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Stuart N. Soroka and Christopher Wlezien. Information and Democracy: Public Policy in the News","authors":"Nate Breznau","doi":"10.1093/poq/nfac055","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfac055","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51359,"journal":{"name":"Public Opinion Quarterly","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2023-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49339736","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Individuals often experience anger after exposure to news about a terrorist attack. Are the coping strategies available to them effective in reducing anger, and with what consequences for policy attitudes? We argue that because terrorism is a complex problem, people should feel better distancing themselves from the threat than engaging in confrontive strategies against it, and this should lead to less extreme attitudes. Across three experimental studies, we induced anger about terrorism and then randomly assigned participants to different opportunities to cope with their anger. The findings show that an emotion-focused coping strategy of distancing oneself from the threat is more effective at reducing anger than a problem-focused coping strategy involving support for confrontational strategies to address it. Furthermore, only distancing strategies reduced extreme stances on terrorism policy. These findings help us understand why some people may disengage from politics, even when angered by it.
{"title":"Emotionally Coping with Terrorism","authors":"A. Banks, Heather M. Hicks, Jennifer L. Merolla","doi":"10.1093/poq/nfac049","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfac049","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Individuals often experience anger after exposure to news about a terrorist attack. Are the coping strategies available to them effective in reducing anger, and with what consequences for policy attitudes? We argue that because terrorism is a complex problem, people should feel better distancing themselves from the threat than engaging in confrontive strategies against it, and this should lead to less extreme attitudes. Across three experimental studies, we induced anger about terrorism and then randomly assigned participants to different opportunities to cope with their anger. The findings show that an emotion-focused coping strategy of distancing oneself from the threat is more effective at reducing anger than a problem-focused coping strategy involving support for confrontational strategies to address it. Furthermore, only distancing strategies reduced extreme stances on terrorism policy. These findings help us understand why some people may disengage from politics, even when angered by it.","PeriodicalId":51359,"journal":{"name":"Public Opinion Quarterly","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2023-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42639692","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Survey research methodology is evolving rapidly, as new technologies provide new opportunities. One of the areas of innovation regards the development of online interview best practices and the advancement of methods that allow researchers to measure the attention that respondents are devoting to the survey task. Reliable measurement of respondent attention can yield important information about the quality of the survey response. In this article, we take advantage of an innovative survey we conducted in 2018, in which we directly connect survey responses to administrative data, allowing us to assess the association between survey attention and response quality. We show that attentive survey respondents are more likely to provide accurate survey responses regarding a number of behaviors and attributes that we can validate with our administrative data. We discuss the best strategy to deal with inattentive respondents in surveys in light of our results.
{"title":"Survey Attention and Self-Reported Political Behavior","authors":"R. M. Alvarez, Yimeng Li","doi":"10.1093/poq/nfac048","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfac048","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Survey research methodology is evolving rapidly, as new technologies provide new opportunities. One of the areas of innovation regards the development of online interview best practices and the advancement of methods that allow researchers to measure the attention that respondents are devoting to the survey task. Reliable measurement of respondent attention can yield important information about the quality of the survey response. In this article, we take advantage of an innovative survey we conducted in 2018, in which we directly connect survey responses to administrative data, allowing us to assess the association between survey attention and response quality. We show that attentive survey respondents are more likely to provide accurate survey responses regarding a number of behaviors and attributes that we can validate with our administrative data. We discuss the best strategy to deal with inattentive respondents in surveys in light of our results.","PeriodicalId":51359,"journal":{"name":"Public Opinion Quarterly","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2023-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41555442","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Retrospective vote choice is a critical question asked in political science surveys. Yet, this question suffers from persistently high item nonresponse rates, which can bias estimates and limit scholars’ ability to make sound inferences. In this paper, we develop a sensitive survey technique to decrease nonresponse to the vote-choice question in a representative, face-to-face survey in Mexico City and Mexico State in 2018–2019. Respondents received different iterations of three treatments: an anonymity guarantee, a confidentiality reminder, and audio-assisted interviewing technology. The use of audio technology combined with a credible anonymity guarantee significantly improved item response. Both anonymity and confidentiality assurances improved the accuracy of response, which more closely resembled official results in the treatment conditions. We then evaluate two non-rival mechanisms that might drive our findings: beliefs about response anonymity and re-engagement with the survey. We find that increased perceptions of response anonymity are associated with improved item response.
{"title":"Reducing Item Nonresponse to Vote-Choice Questions: Evidence from a Survey Experiment in Mexico","authors":"Mollie J Cohen, Kaitlen J Cassell","doi":"10.1093/poq/nfad002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfad002","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Retrospective vote choice is a critical question asked in political science surveys. Yet, this question suffers from persistently high item nonresponse rates, which can bias estimates and limit scholars’ ability to make sound inferences. In this paper, we develop a sensitive survey technique to decrease nonresponse to the vote-choice question in a representative, face-to-face survey in Mexico City and Mexico State in 2018–2019. Respondents received different iterations of three treatments: an anonymity guarantee, a confidentiality reminder, and audio-assisted interviewing technology. The use of audio technology combined with a credible anonymity guarantee significantly improved item response. Both anonymity and confidentiality assurances improved the accuracy of response, which more closely resembled official results in the treatment conditions. We then evaluate two non-rival mechanisms that might drive our findings: beliefs about response anonymity and re-engagement with the survey. We find that increased perceptions of response anonymity are associated with improved item response.","PeriodicalId":51359,"journal":{"name":"Public Opinion Quarterly","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134941980","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Joan Barceló, Greg Chih-Hsin Sheen, Hans H Tung, Wen-Chin Wu
Who is more influential in shaping citizens' health-related behaviors, experts or politicians? We conduct five conjoint experiments on 6,255 residents of France, Germany, Spain, the United Kingdom, and the United States, asking them to evaluate COVID-19 vaccines alongside randomly varying endorsements from national politicians and medical professionals. In every country, our results show that citizens are more likely to rely on medical professionals, the experts, more than on politicians when choosing a COVID-19 vaccine. Even after accounting for citizens' political alignment with the government, our evidence reveals that politicians play a very limited role in shaping vaccine acceptance. These results have implications for the role of political elites in shaping people's behaviors amid a large-scale crisis.
{"title":"Experts or Politicians? Citizen Responses to Vaccine Endorsements across Five OECD Countries","authors":"Joan Barceló, Greg Chih-Hsin Sheen, Hans H Tung, Wen-Chin Wu","doi":"10.1093/poq/nfad008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfad008","url":null,"abstract":"Who is more influential in shaping citizens' health-related behaviors, experts or politicians? We conduct five conjoint experiments on 6,255 residents of France, Germany, Spain, the United Kingdom, and the United States, asking them to evaluate COVID-19 vaccines alongside randomly varying endorsements from national politicians and medical professionals. In every country, our results show that citizens are more likely to rely on medical professionals, the experts, more than on politicians when choosing a COVID-19 vaccine. Even after accounting for citizens' political alignment with the government, our evidence reveals that politicians play a very limited role in shaping vaccine acceptance. These results have implications for the role of political elites in shaping people's behaviors amid a large-scale crisis.","PeriodicalId":51359,"journal":{"name":"Public Opinion Quarterly","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134942337","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Party elite cues are among the most well-established influences on citizens’ political opinions. Yet, there is substantial variation in effect sizes across studies, constraining the generalizability and theoretical development of party elite cues research. Understanding the causes of variation in party elite cue effects is thus a priority for advancing the field. In this paper, I estimate the variation in party elite cue effects that is caused simply by heterogeneity in the policy issues being examined, through a reanalysis of data from existing research combined with an original survey experiment comprising 34 contemporary American policy issues. My estimate of the between-issue variation in effects is substantively large, plausibly equal to somewhere between one-third and two-thirds the size of the between-study variation observed in the existing literature. This result has important implications for our understanding of party elite influence on public opinion and for the methodological practices of party elite cues research.
{"title":"Estimating the Between-Issue Variation in Party Elite Cue Effects","authors":"Ben M Tappin","doi":"10.1093/poq/nfac052","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfac052","url":null,"abstract":"Party elite cues are among the most well-established influences on citizens’ political opinions. Yet, there is substantial variation in effect sizes across studies, constraining the generalizability and theoretical development of party elite cues research. Understanding the causes of variation in party elite cue effects is thus a priority for advancing the field. In this paper, I estimate the variation in party elite cue effects that is caused simply by heterogeneity in the policy issues being examined, through a reanalysis of data from existing research combined with an original survey experiment comprising 34 contemporary American policy issues. My estimate of the between-issue variation in effects is substantively large, plausibly equal to somewhere between one-third and two-thirds the size of the between-study variation observed in the existing literature. This result has important implications for our understanding of party elite influence on public opinion and for the methodological practices of party elite cues research.","PeriodicalId":51359,"journal":{"name":"Public Opinion Quarterly","volume":"242 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138504612","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
There has been increasing concern among commentators and scholars about polarization in Canada. This note uses the Canadian Election Study from 1993 to 2019 to measure trends in ideological divergence, ideological consistency, and partisan-ideological sorting in the Canadian mass public. It finds only mixed evidence that Canadians are diverging ideologically and becoming more polarized—ideological distributions are unimodal and trends toward more dispersion are slight and driven entirely by the last two election cycles. Canadians are, however, becoming modestly more ideologically consistent and much more sorted—that is, partisanship, ideological identification, and policy beliefs are increasingly interconnected. These findings call for additional research on the causes and consequences of mass polarization in Canada and further efforts to situate these results, along with findings from the United States, in a comparative context.
{"title":"Polarization Eh? Ideological Divergence and Partisan Sorting in the Canadian Mass Public","authors":"Eric Merkley","doi":"10.1093/poq/nfac047","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfac047","url":null,"abstract":"There has been increasing concern among commentators and scholars about polarization in Canada. This note uses the Canadian Election Study from 1993 to 2019 to measure trends in ideological divergence, ideological consistency, and partisan-ideological sorting in the Canadian mass public. It finds only mixed evidence that Canadians are diverging ideologically and becoming more polarized—ideological distributions are unimodal and trends toward more dispersion are slight and driven entirely by the last two election cycles. Canadians are, however, becoming modestly more ideologically consistent and much more sorted—that is, partisanship, ideological identification, and policy beliefs are increasingly interconnected. These findings call for additional research on the causes and consequences of mass polarization in Canada and further efforts to situate these results, along with findings from the United States, in a comparative context.","PeriodicalId":51359,"journal":{"name":"Public Opinion Quarterly","volume":"244 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138504611","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Prior research suggests that citizen attitudes toward electoral laws and reforms derive from how individuals weigh two competing considerations: the rule’s procedural fairness and one’s partisan self-interest (or how they perceive the policy affects their party’s electoral prospects). Recent experimental work shows that despite a role for fairness concerns, policy support levels shift (at least to a degree) based on its anticipated impact on who votes. We examine how the presentation of the trade-off between fairness and partisan advantage influences election reform opinions. Using two sets of survey experiments, we find that priming fairness reduces, but does not eliminate, the effect of partisan self-interest in shaping policy evaluations. Priming a reform’s constitutionality so as to provide cover to infringe upon fairness considerations, however, does not exacerbate the impact of partisan self-interest on support for adoption. These results expand our understanding of how citizens weigh different factors when assessing electoral policies.
{"title":"How Priming Fairness and Priming Constitutionality Impact the Effect of Partisan Self-Interest on Citizen Support for Election Reforms","authors":"Daniel R Biggers, Shaun Bowler","doi":"10.1093/poq/nfad010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfad010","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Prior research suggests that citizen attitudes toward electoral laws and reforms derive from how individuals weigh two competing considerations: the rule’s procedural fairness and one’s partisan self-interest (or how they perceive the policy affects their party’s electoral prospects). Recent experimental work shows that despite a role for fairness concerns, policy support levels shift (at least to a degree) based on its anticipated impact on who votes. We examine how the presentation of the trade-off between fairness and partisan advantage influences election reform opinions. Using two sets of survey experiments, we find that priming fairness reduces, but does not eliminate, the effect of partisan self-interest in shaping policy evaluations. Priming a reform’s constitutionality so as to provide cover to infringe upon fairness considerations, however, does not exacerbate the impact of partisan self-interest on support for adoption. These results expand our understanding of how citizens weigh different factors when assessing electoral policies.","PeriodicalId":51359,"journal":{"name":"Public Opinion Quarterly","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134977611","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
What shapes Americans’ policy preferences: partisanship or policy content? While previous studies have addressed this question, many of them focused on high-salience policies. This raises an identification challenge because the content of such policies contains party cues. The current study employs a diverse set of low-salience policies to discern the unique effects of party cues and policy content, before the issues are “hijacked” by the parties. These policies are embedded in an original conjoint experiment administered among a national US sample. The design enables me to assess the effects of policy content and partisan sponsorship orthogonally. Contrary to previous studies, I find that respondents are attentive to policy content on low-salience issues, and it influences their policy preferences similarly or even more than party cues, across policy domains. Moreover, the support patterns and levels of Democrats and Republicans for many low-salience policies are similar. Party cues, by contrast, polarize partisans’ preferences across domains.
{"title":"Before the Party Hijacks: The Limited Role of Party Cues in Appraisal of Low-Salience Policies—Experimental Evidence","authors":"Clareta Treger","doi":"10.1093/poq/nfac044","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfac044","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 What shapes Americans’ policy preferences: partisanship or policy content? While previous studies have addressed this question, many of them focused on high-salience policies. This raises an identification challenge because the content of such policies contains party cues. The current study employs a diverse set of low-salience policies to discern the unique effects of party cues and policy content, before the issues are “hijacked” by the parties. These policies are embedded in an original conjoint experiment administered among a national US sample. The design enables me to assess the effects of policy content and partisan sponsorship orthogonally. Contrary to previous studies, I find that respondents are attentive to policy content on low-salience issues, and it influences their policy preferences similarly or even more than party cues, across policy domains. Moreover, the support patterns and levels of Democrats and Republicans for many low-salience policies are similar. Party cues, by contrast, polarize partisans’ preferences across domains.","PeriodicalId":51359,"journal":{"name":"Public Opinion Quarterly","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2023-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45188514","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","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：