Pub Date : 2023-05-19DOI: 10.1177/10659129231176820
Niels Selling
Political scientists have repeatedly failed to establish a relationship between the money companies funnel into political campaigns and how members of Congress vote. Notably, studies have mainly examined how campaign contributions affect the voting of their direct recipients. However, considering the partisan divide and intense power struggle between the two major American parties, this paper proposes that the influence of campaign contributions operates at the party level. That means a member of Congress is more likely to side with a firm whose donations favor her party, even if the firm has not given to the member’s own campaign. Correspondingly, legislators should be less likely to vote in line with the policy preferences of firms whose donations predominately go to the other party. A quantitative analysis of campaign contributions, corporate policy positions, and roll-call votes in Congress bears out these propositions. While the paper also uncovers a recipient effect, the party effect is more substantial.
{"title":"Either with Us or Against Us: Business Power and Campaign Contributions in an Age of Hyper-Partisanship","authors":"Niels Selling","doi":"10.1177/10659129231176820","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231176820","url":null,"abstract":"Political scientists have repeatedly failed to establish a relationship between the money companies funnel into political campaigns and how members of Congress vote. Notably, studies have mainly examined how campaign contributions affect the voting of their direct recipients. However, considering the partisan divide and intense power struggle between the two major American parties, this paper proposes that the influence of campaign contributions operates at the party level. That means a member of Congress is more likely to side with a firm whose donations favor her party, even if the firm has not given to the member’s own campaign. Correspondingly, legislators should be less likely to vote in line with the policy preferences of firms whose donations predominately go to the other party. A quantitative analysis of campaign contributions, corporate policy positions, and roll-call votes in Congress bears out these propositions. While the paper also uncovers a recipient effect, the party effect is more substantial.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2023-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48883404","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-17DOI: 10.1177/10659129231176212
David Karol
A partisan divide over LGBT rights has emerged in the U.S. Yet unlike other issues on which the parties have traded places or polarized, most of the change on gay rights has occurred within one party, the Democrats. How did this unusual change occur? LGBT rights was originally a fringe cause, rejected by most politicians in both parties. As gay rights activists slowly became more prominent in the Democratic Party, many politicians adapted, abandoning earlier positions informed by their personal backgrounds and state or district constituencies. Meanwhile, incorporating the religious right led most Republicans to maintain the anti-LGBT rights stand that was once common to both parties, even as public opinion shifted. The result was a partisan divide in this issue area that had consequences for policy. The role of adaptation by incumbents in producing it—contrary to some prominent models—is evident in both Congressional co-sponsorship and roll-call data. The growing party divide is also evident in platforms. These findings contribute to a broader understanding of how party position change occurs.
{"title":"How Does Party Position Change Happen? The Case of LGBT Rights in the U.S.","authors":"David Karol","doi":"10.1177/10659129231176212","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231176212","url":null,"abstract":"A partisan divide over LGBT rights has emerged in the U.S. Yet unlike other issues on which the parties have traded places or polarized, most of the change on gay rights has occurred within one party, the Democrats. How did this unusual change occur? LGBT rights was originally a fringe cause, rejected by most politicians in both parties. As gay rights activists slowly became more prominent in the Democratic Party, many politicians adapted, abandoning earlier positions informed by their personal backgrounds and state or district constituencies. Meanwhile, incorporating the religious right led most Republicans to maintain the anti-LGBT rights stand that was once common to both parties, even as public opinion shifted. The result was a partisan divide in this issue area that had consequences for policy. The role of adaptation by incumbents in producing it—contrary to some prominent models—is evident in both Congressional co-sponsorship and roll-call data. The growing party divide is also evident in platforms. These findings contribute to a broader understanding of how party position change occurs.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2023-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42901535","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-12DOI: 10.1177/10659129231175169
James A. Sieja
Recent work on the federal judicial nominations process finds relationships between nominees’ characteristics, such as partisanship and gender, and American Bar Association (ABA) ratings. While the findings inform public debate about ABA involvement in the nomination, the studies do not take into account the characteristics of the individuals who investigate the nominees. This study adds investigator partisanship to understand more completely the relationship between nominees and their ABA ratings. The results indicate that the Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary (SCFJ) investigators’ partisanship contribute systematically to a nominee’s likelihood of receiving a higher or lower ABA rating. The probability that a Republican nominee receives the highest rating does not vary with the investigator’s partisanship. Democratic nominees, however, have the highest chance of the top rating after an SCFJ investigation led by a co-partisan. An analysis of matched data from the whole dataset reproduces the basic pattern of results, while the implementation of matching to partisan subgroups of nominees uncovers that both parties may benefit roughly equally from investigations led by co-partisans.
{"title":"How You Rate Depends on Who Investigates: Partisan Bias in ABA Ratings of US Courts of Appeals Nominees, 1958–2020","authors":"James A. Sieja","doi":"10.1177/10659129231175169","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231175169","url":null,"abstract":"Recent work on the federal judicial nominations process finds relationships between nominees’ characteristics, such as partisanship and gender, and American Bar Association (ABA) ratings. While the findings inform public debate about ABA involvement in the nomination, the studies do not take into account the characteristics of the individuals who investigate the nominees. This study adds investigator partisanship to understand more completely the relationship between nominees and their ABA ratings. The results indicate that the Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary (SCFJ) investigators’ partisanship contribute systematically to a nominee’s likelihood of receiving a higher or lower ABA rating. The probability that a Republican nominee receives the highest rating does not vary with the investigator’s partisanship. Democratic nominees, however, have the highest chance of the top rating after an SCFJ investigation led by a co-partisan. An analysis of matched data from the whole dataset reproduces the basic pattern of results, while the implementation of matching to partisan subgroups of nominees uncovers that both parties may benefit roughly equally from investigations led by co-partisans.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2023-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41895756","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-11DOI: 10.1177/10659129231174842
George A. Krause, Jason S. Byers
Administrative leader turnover adversely affects the organizational stability of U.S. federal executive agencies, as well as undermines presidents’ policy goals. An incentive compatibility theory of administrative leader turnover is proposed that distinguishes between proponent (policy priority) versus caretaker (non-policy priority) loyalist executive appointees. This theory predicts that the proponents’ tenure will be comparatively more stable since it reflects incentive compatibility for both the president and executive appointee compared to caretakers where such a relationship is lacking. The evidence comports with this logic by demonstrating that appointee loyalty results in a longer tenure in office when their agency constitutes a stated policy priority for the president at the time of agreed upon service compared to when this happens not to be the case. Responsive competence in executive administration requires incentive compatibility that benefits both the president and executive appointees for ensuring stable leadership of U.S. federal agencies.
{"title":"Proponents, Caretakers, and the Dynamics of Administrative Leadership Turnover in U.S. Executive Agencies","authors":"George A. Krause, Jason S. Byers","doi":"10.1177/10659129231174842","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231174842","url":null,"abstract":"Administrative leader turnover adversely affects the organizational stability of U.S. federal executive agencies, as well as undermines presidents’ policy goals. An incentive compatibility theory of administrative leader turnover is proposed that distinguishes between proponent (policy priority) versus caretaker (non-policy priority) loyalist executive appointees. This theory predicts that the proponents’ tenure will be comparatively more stable since it reflects incentive compatibility for both the president and executive appointee compared to caretakers where such a relationship is lacking. The evidence comports with this logic by demonstrating that appointee loyalty results in a longer tenure in office when their agency constitutes a stated policy priority for the president at the time of agreed upon service compared to when this happens not to be the case. Responsive competence in executive administration requires incentive compatibility that benefits both the president and executive appointees for ensuring stable leadership of U.S. federal agencies.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2023-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47361554","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-04DOI: 10.1177/10659129231173340
C. Phillips
Descriptive representation is shaped by more than the number of seats group members win—it is also informed by how group members hold on to seats long after election day. Drawing from the literatures on women of color, women, and minorities in politics, this study argues that the relationship between incumbents and descriptive representation is different among groups that hold distinctive political positioning and power. To uncover those differences, the article introduces a new measure called descriptive maintenance, which accounts for a group’s ability to retain descriptive representation in a seat across unique group members and elections. This multidimensional approach expands current conceptualizations by treating incumbency and descriptive representation as interrelated, group-level, phenomena. This framework is tested using nearly 60,000 observations of state elections data in an analysis focused on a group of state legislative incumbents that has rarely been explicitly examined, and yet outnumbers all others: white men.
{"title":"Nevertheless, He Persisted: White Men and the Links Between Incumbency and Group Descriptive Representation","authors":"C. Phillips","doi":"10.1177/10659129231173340","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231173340","url":null,"abstract":"Descriptive representation is shaped by more than the number of seats group members win—it is also informed by how group members hold on to seats long after election day. Drawing from the literatures on women of color, women, and minorities in politics, this study argues that the relationship between incumbents and descriptive representation is different among groups that hold distinctive political positioning and power. To uncover those differences, the article introduces a new measure called descriptive maintenance, which accounts for a group’s ability to retain descriptive representation in a seat across unique group members and elections. This multidimensional approach expands current conceptualizations by treating incumbency and descriptive representation as interrelated, group-level, phenomena. This framework is tested using nearly 60,000 observations of state elections data in an analysis focused on a group of state legislative incumbents that has rarely been explicitly examined, and yet outnumbers all others: white men.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2023-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49039978","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-29DOI: 10.1177/10659129231164947
C. L. Boyd, R. Carlos, Margaret H. Taylor, Matthew E. Baker, Elise Blasingame
Within the politically charged immigration system in the United States, Congress mandates the entry of in absentia removal orders against immigrants who fail to appear for immigration court hearings. Statutory guidance similarly constrains the ability of appellate courts to overturn those in absentia orders. In this article, we examine how federal circuit court judges make decisions in the review of in absentia orders when faced with discretion-revoking congressional statutory language pitted against a highly politicized area of law where policy preferences sit at the forefront of judges’ minds. Using an original dataset of U.S. Courts of Appeals cases decided from 2001 to 2020, we find that pro-immigrant decisions are rare, as intended by the governing statute. We also find, however, that judicial policy preferences predict the degree to which federal judges support the petitioning immigrant through statutory factors related to the adequacy of government notice and the presence of exceptional circumstances to justify nonappearance.
{"title":"Congressional Constraint? The Review of In Absentia Immigration Removal Orders in Federal Circuit Courts","authors":"C. L. Boyd, R. Carlos, Margaret H. Taylor, Matthew E. Baker, Elise Blasingame","doi":"10.1177/10659129231164947","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231164947","url":null,"abstract":"Within the politically charged immigration system in the United States, Congress mandates the entry of in absentia removal orders against immigrants who fail to appear for immigration court hearings. Statutory guidance similarly constrains the ability of appellate courts to overturn those in absentia orders. In this article, we examine how federal circuit court judges make decisions in the review of in absentia orders when faced with discretion-revoking congressional statutory language pitted against a highly politicized area of law where policy preferences sit at the forefront of judges’ minds. Using an original dataset of U.S. Courts of Appeals cases decided from 2001 to 2020, we find that pro-immigrant decisions are rare, as intended by the governing statute. We also find, however, that judicial policy preferences predict the degree to which federal judges support the petitioning immigrant through statutory factors related to the adequacy of government notice and the presence of exceptional circumstances to justify nonappearance.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2023-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47340525","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-28DOI: 10.1177/10659129231172415
Joseph Clarkson
The return of war in Europe has renewed the urgency of understanding war’s role in the interstate system. Although many theorists take a progressive view in which war is withering away, others argue war remains a recurrent feature of political life. This article contributes to theoretical debates about war’s ongoing significance by systematically reconstructing Hegel’s theory of war and its relevance for understanding war’s persistence. Historically, Hegel thinks war has taken increasingly rational forms over time, though, contrary to optimistic interpretations, this points to enmity’s distillation rather than its elimination. Causally, Hegel suggests war occurs because the lack of a power above states capable of adjudicating conflicting rights and the consequent struggle to enforce one’s formally valid claims against those who could substantively deny them. Ethically, Hegel holds war is a necessary evil which, abstractly, ought to end. However, since war teaches citizens that their good is tied to the good of the community as a whole, thereby restraining civil society’s encroachments on the political, Hegel denies the end of war would be an absolute ethical good. By systematically reconstructing Hegel’s views on war, this article sheds new light on war’s role in the system of European states.
{"title":"Hegel, History, Hostility: The Persistence of War in Hegel’s Political Philosophy","authors":"Joseph Clarkson","doi":"10.1177/10659129231172415","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231172415","url":null,"abstract":"The return of war in Europe has renewed the urgency of understanding war’s role in the interstate system. Although many theorists take a progressive view in which war is withering away, others argue war remains a recurrent feature of political life. This article contributes to theoretical debates about war’s ongoing significance by systematically reconstructing Hegel’s theory of war and its relevance for understanding war’s persistence. Historically, Hegel thinks war has taken increasingly rational forms over time, though, contrary to optimistic interpretations, this points to enmity’s distillation rather than its elimination. Causally, Hegel suggests war occurs because the lack of a power above states capable of adjudicating conflicting rights and the consequent struggle to enforce one’s formally valid claims against those who could substantively deny them. Ethically, Hegel holds war is a necessary evil which, abstractly, ought to end. However, since war teaches citizens that their good is tied to the good of the community as a whole, thereby restraining civil society’s encroachments on the political, Hegel denies the end of war would be an absolute ethical good. By systematically reconstructing Hegel’s views on war, this article sheds new light on war’s role in the system of European states.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2023-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47565086","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-23DOI: 10.1177/10659129231171516
Laura Schenker, David Sylvan, J. Arcand, R. Bhavnani
Differential police conduct may be attributed both to residential racial segregation and more general discriminatory attitudes and policies. We draw upon ethnographic and other studies of everyday policing to propose that police, in the context of racially segregated neighborhoods, intensively surveil individuals who are “out of place” in terms of their race and the local geographical context in which they are found. We then use statistical evidence from the New York City Police Department to compare stops in different neighborhoods. We find that the NYPD indeed carries out “stops” that differentially target African Americans and Hispanics present in predominantly white precincts, with the degree of surveillance increasing as precincts become more white, and as stops become more generic and less about specific, identifiable crimes.
{"title":"Segregation and “Out-of-Placeness”: The Direct Effect of Neighborhood Racial Composition on Police Stops","authors":"Laura Schenker, David Sylvan, J. Arcand, R. Bhavnani","doi":"10.1177/10659129231171516","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231171516","url":null,"abstract":"Differential police conduct may be attributed both to residential racial segregation and more general discriminatory attitudes and policies. We draw upon ethnographic and other studies of everyday policing to propose that police, in the context of racially segregated neighborhoods, intensively surveil individuals who are “out of place” in terms of their race and the local geographical context in which they are found. We then use statistical evidence from the New York City Police Department to compare stops in different neighborhoods. We find that the NYPD indeed carries out “stops” that differentially target African Americans and Hispanics present in predominantly white precincts, with the degree of surveillance increasing as precincts become more white, and as stops become more generic and less about specific, identifiable crimes.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2023-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47489856","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-21DOI: 10.1177/10659129231171520
E. Swank
Though marriage is seemingly attached to the private sphere and politics to the public sphere, marriage and politics operate as intertwined institutions. Political parties routinely pitch themselves as “the protector of family values” and getting married can shift a person’s political commitments. Studies generally agree that married people in different-sex marriages are more conservative than single or divorced individuals, but there is uncertainty as to whether same-sex marriages have the same political ramifications. This study examined data from the 2010–2102 American National Election Survey and found that sexual identity sometimes modifies the conservative elements of marriage (n = 3815). Same-sex marriages inspired greater participation in antiracist, queer, and feminist social movements while different-sex marriage showed an inverse relationship. Implications for how these findings require a rethinking of the marriage and politics are addressed as well.
{"title":"Sexual Identities and the Role of Marriage in Social Movement Activism","authors":"E. Swank","doi":"10.1177/10659129231171520","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231171520","url":null,"abstract":"Though marriage is seemingly attached to the private sphere and politics to the public sphere, marriage and politics operate as intertwined institutions. Political parties routinely pitch themselves as “the protector of family values” and getting married can shift a person’s political commitments. Studies generally agree that married people in different-sex marriages are more conservative than single or divorced individuals, but there is uncertainty as to whether same-sex marriages have the same political ramifications. This study examined data from the 2010–2102 American National Election Survey and found that sexual identity sometimes modifies the conservative elements of marriage (n = 3815). Same-sex marriages inspired greater participation in antiracist, queer, and feminist social movements while different-sex marriage showed an inverse relationship. Implications for how these findings require a rethinking of the marriage and politics are addressed as well.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2023-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43763168","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-17DOI: 10.1177/10659129231169712
Christopher Shortell, Melody E. Valdini
While existing literature has established that women leaders are stereotyped as more likely to uphold the norms of democracy, the power of this effect in the non-democratic context is not established. We address this gap and argue that the context of regime transition cultivates a unique dynamic in which the stereotypes associated with women justices become especially valuable to both citizens and the state. However, we argue that this perception of women contributing to the health of democracy is not constant across all citizens equally; instead, those people with high levels of hostile bias against women are more likely to view women as the potential saviors of the democracy. To test our theories, we offer original survey data from Thailand and Poland, two countries in the midst of regime transition. We find evidence that suggests that the impact of women justices on assessments of democratic health is indeed dependent on hostile bias in Thailand, but that the relationship is not found in Poland. Our results suggest that bias can sometimes operate in unexpected ways, and that scholars should consider multiple measures of different types of bias when investigating its effects on behavior.
{"title":"Madame Justice Will Save Our Democracy: Gender Bias and Perceptions of the High Court in Transitional Regimes","authors":"Christopher Shortell, Melody E. Valdini","doi":"10.1177/10659129231169712","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231169712","url":null,"abstract":"While existing literature has established that women leaders are stereotyped as more likely to uphold the norms of democracy, the power of this effect in the non-democratic context is not established. We address this gap and argue that the context of regime transition cultivates a unique dynamic in which the stereotypes associated with women justices become especially valuable to both citizens and the state. However, we argue that this perception of women contributing to the health of democracy is not constant across all citizens equally; instead, those people with high levels of hostile bias against women are more likely to view women as the potential saviors of the democracy. To test our theories, we offer original survey data from Thailand and Poland, two countries in the midst of regime transition. We find evidence that suggests that the impact of women justices on assessments of democratic health is indeed dependent on hostile bias in Thailand, but that the relationship is not found in Poland. Our results suggest that bias can sometimes operate in unexpected ways, and that scholars should consider multiple measures of different types of bias when investigating its effects on behavior.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2023-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45778876","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"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：