Pub Date : 2023-10-03DOI: 10.1177/10659129231205296
Felix Wiebrecht
A growing body of literature studies the personalization of power in authoritarian regimes. Yet, how institutions can become a credible constraint to dictatorial rule is less widely studied. I theorize that corruption is a key factor associated with stronger legislatures in authoritarian regimes. By engaging in corruption, authoritarian elites in ruling coalitions can build up networks of support and influence and ultimately, use their elevated position to impel more legislative powers vis-à-vis the executive. Examining panel data on the strength of legislatures in authoritarian regimes between 1946 and 2010, I show empirically that authoritarian parliaments are stronger when levels of corruption in a given regime are high. The link between corruption and legislative strength is especially strong in the Middle East and Africa, and primarily applies to party-based and military dictatorships. More competitive electoral and legislative processes, however, do not uniformly affect parliaments’ strength. These findings contribute to our understanding of institutional changes in autocracies and highlight the centrality of elite contestations in determining institutional trajectories.
{"title":"Corruption, Elite Contestation, and Parliaments: Why Do Legislatures Become Stronger in Authoritarian Regimes?","authors":"Felix Wiebrecht","doi":"10.1177/10659129231205296","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231205296","url":null,"abstract":"A growing body of literature studies the personalization of power in authoritarian regimes. Yet, how institutions can become a credible constraint to dictatorial rule is less widely studied. I theorize that corruption is a key factor associated with stronger legislatures in authoritarian regimes. By engaging in corruption, authoritarian elites in ruling coalitions can build up networks of support and influence and ultimately, use their elevated position to impel more legislative powers vis-à-vis the executive. Examining panel data on the strength of legislatures in authoritarian regimes between 1946 and 2010, I show empirically that authoritarian parliaments are stronger when levels of corruption in a given regime are high. The link between corruption and legislative strength is especially strong in the Middle East and Africa, and primarily applies to party-based and military dictatorships. More competitive electoral and legislative processes, however, do not uniformly affect parliaments’ strength. These findings contribute to our understanding of institutional changes in autocracies and highlight the centrality of elite contestations in determining institutional trajectories.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":"46 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135739105","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 : 2023-09-29DOI: 10.1177/10659129231204234
Mark D. Ramirez, Reed M. Wood
Government restrictions intended to mitigate the spread of COVID-19—such as “lockdowns,” mask mandates, and vaccine passports—produced intense resentment among some groups and led to resistance, defiance, and social unrest in many countries. To better understand the roots of this opposition, we examine the role of dispositional authoritarianism as a psychological motivator of participation in anti-restriction protests and support for the groups that engaged in such actions. Because obedience to authority is commonly identified as a core feature of authoritarianism, existing studies have suggested authoritarians should be more likely to endorse pandemic restrictions and oppose anti-government dissent. However, we propose the alternative hypothesis: individuals with authoritarian dispositions are more likely to oppose pandemic restrictions and more likely to express support for pandemic dissidents (e.g., anti-vax and anti-lockdown groups). Data from three surveys deployed in the United States and United Kingdom support our hypotheses, demonstrating a counterintuitive relationship between dispositional authoritarianism and opposition to public health authorities during the pandemic. We further find that dispositional authoritarianism produces an intriguing misalignment between ideology and support for pandemic restrictions among those on the left, leading liberals who score high in authoritarianism to mirror the attitudes and behaviors of their conservative counterparts.
{"title":"Authoritarian Opposition? Authoritarian Disposition and Resistance to Public Health Mitigation Strategies During COVID-19","authors":"Mark D. Ramirez, Reed M. Wood","doi":"10.1177/10659129231204234","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231204234","url":null,"abstract":"Government restrictions intended to mitigate the spread of COVID-19—such as “lockdowns,” mask mandates, and vaccine passports—produced intense resentment among some groups and led to resistance, defiance, and social unrest in many countries. To better understand the roots of this opposition, we examine the role of dispositional authoritarianism as a psychological motivator of participation in anti-restriction protests and support for the groups that engaged in such actions. Because obedience to authority is commonly identified as a core feature of authoritarianism, existing studies have suggested authoritarians should be more likely to endorse pandemic restrictions and oppose anti-government dissent. However, we propose the alternative hypothesis: individuals with authoritarian dispositions are more likely to oppose pandemic restrictions and more likely to express support for pandemic dissidents (e.g., anti-vax and anti-lockdown groups). Data from three surveys deployed in the United States and United Kingdom support our hypotheses, demonstrating a counterintuitive relationship between dispositional authoritarianism and opposition to public health authorities during the pandemic. We further find that dispositional authoritarianism produces an intriguing misalignment between ideology and support for pandemic restrictions among those on the left, leading liberals who score high in authoritarianism to mirror the attitudes and behaviors of their conservative counterparts.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":"57 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135247594","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 : 2023-09-29DOI: 10.1177/10659129231182404
Samuel T. Morgan
The United States’ invasion of Grenada in 1983 represented the lowest point in Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan’s relationship, with Thatcher incensed at what she perceived to be her ally’s misuse of military force. However, in April 1986, Thatcher gave permission for the United States to use British-based aircraft for air strikes against the Gaddafi regime in Libya, a mission as tenuously grounded in international law as Grenada. How do we explain Thatcher’s apparent change in approach to foreign policy, now placing strategic interests above her previous deference to international law, and what does this tell us about the role experience plays in a leader’s foreign policy decisions? Drawing on insights from the ongoing behavioural revolution in International Relations, this paper argues that the experience Thatcher gained during the Grenada episode led to her support for US strikes against Libya. A process tracing approach using documents from the UK National Archives, as well as biographies and memoirs, tests this individual-level hypothesis against a rival structuralist explanation. This research shows how experience gained in office can influence a leader’s future foreign policy decision-making and demonstrates the utility of process tracing methods for investigations into the role of experience in international politics.
1983年，美国入侵格林纳达，这是玛格丽特•撒切尔(Margaret Thatcher)与罗纳德•里根(Ronald Reagan)关系的最低点。在她看来，美国滥用武力激怒了撒切尔。然而，1986年4月，撒切尔夫人允许美国使用英国的飞机对利比亚的卡扎菲政权进行空袭，这一任务与格林纳达一样，都是基于国际法的。我们如何解释撒切尔在外交政策上的明显变化，现在把战略利益置于她之前对国际法的尊重之上，这告诉我们经验在领导人的外交政策决定中所起的作用?根据正在进行的国际关系行为革命的见解，本文认为，撒切尔在格林纳达事件中获得的经验导致她支持美国对利比亚的打击。利用英国国家档案馆(UK National Archives)的文件以及传记和回忆录，一种过程追踪方法检验了这种个人层面的假设，以对抗结构主义的解释。这项研究表明，在职期间获得的经验如何影响领导人未来的外交政策决策，并展示了过程追踪方法在调查经验在国际政治中的作用方面的实用性。
{"title":"Using Process Tracing to Investigate Elite Experience Accrual: Explaining Margaret Thatcher’s Support for US Air Strikes Against Libya","authors":"Samuel T. Morgan","doi":"10.1177/10659129231182404","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231182404","url":null,"abstract":"The United States’ invasion of Grenada in 1983 represented the lowest point in Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan’s relationship, with Thatcher incensed at what she perceived to be her ally’s misuse of military force. However, in April 1986, Thatcher gave permission for the United States to use British-based aircraft for air strikes against the Gaddafi regime in Libya, a mission as tenuously grounded in international law as Grenada. How do we explain Thatcher’s apparent change in approach to foreign policy, now placing strategic interests above her previous deference to international law, and what does this tell us about the role experience plays in a leader’s foreign policy decisions? Drawing on insights from the ongoing behavioural revolution in International Relations, this paper argues that the experience Thatcher gained during the Grenada episode led to her support for US strikes against Libya. A process tracing approach using documents from the UK National Archives, as well as biographies and memoirs, tests this individual-level hypothesis against a rival structuralist explanation. This research shows how experience gained in office can influence a leader’s future foreign policy decision-making and demonstrates the utility of process tracing methods for investigations into the role of experience in international politics.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135192519","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 : 2023-09-28DOI: 10.1177/10659129231204833
Derefe Kimarley Chevannes
This paper proffers an Afromodern analysis of black liberation, embodied in the Black Lives Matter movement. In doing so, it revisits the historical concept of barbarism as a critical modality for human silencing, in order to make sense of anti-black racism in our extant social order and its re-articulation through systematic discourses of black criminality. The essay explores two dialectically opposing modernities as having differentiated effects on the construction of the human being. Euromodernity barbarizes the black subject as a carceral being, absent political speech. Afromodernity, contrastingly, fashions the black subject as a communicative being endowed with political speech and as such, black politics becomes not a relic of barbarism, but in lieu, embodies a modern re-enactment of political society. The paper concludes that Black Lives Matter functions as an Afromodern displacement of Euromodern anti-black racism by contesting American democracy as a carceral apparatus to ensure a democratic revolution.
{"title":"Black Lives Matter Toward Afromodernity: Political Speech, Barbarism, and the Euromodern World","authors":"Derefe Kimarley Chevannes","doi":"10.1177/10659129231204833","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231204833","url":null,"abstract":"This paper proffers an Afromodern analysis of black liberation, embodied in the Black Lives Matter movement. In doing so, it revisits the historical concept of barbarism as a critical modality for human silencing, in order to make sense of anti-black racism in our extant social order and its re-articulation through systematic discourses of black criminality. The essay explores two dialectically opposing modernities as having differentiated effects on the construction of the human being. Euromodernity barbarizes the black subject as a carceral being, absent political speech. Afromodernity, contrastingly, fashions the black subject as a communicative being endowed with political speech and as such, black politics becomes not a relic of barbarism, but in lieu, embodies a modern re-enactment of political society. The paper concludes that Black Lives Matter functions as an Afromodern displacement of Euromodern anti-black racism by contesting American democracy as a carceral apparatus to ensure a democratic revolution.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135343934","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 : 2023-09-23DOI: 10.1177/10659129231202969
Jake Haselswerdt, Jeffrey A. Fine
While existing research shows why politicians’ social media messages spread online, we know comparatively less about the types of individuals who see these messages. The current study tests whether Americans’ exposure to posts from political elites is best explained by their partisan allegiance (homophily) or the intensity of their political engagement. To test this question, we employ data from a 2020 Cooperative Election Study module that asks respondents how often they encounter social media posts from various political figures. We find that both homophily and intensity characterize exposure to elite messages: partisans and ideologues not only tend to encounter posts from politicians on their own side of the aisle most often, but they also encounter posts from politicians on the opposite side more often than do independent or moderate respondents. The role of intensity relative to homophily is greatest for posts by former President Donald Trump, which Democrats were more likely to encounter than Republicans or independents.
{"title":"Echo Chambers or Doom Scrolling? Homophily, Intensity, and Exposure to Elite Social Media Messages","authors":"Jake Haselswerdt, Jeffrey A. Fine","doi":"10.1177/10659129231202969","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231202969","url":null,"abstract":"While existing research shows why politicians’ social media messages spread online, we know comparatively less about the types of individuals who see these messages. The current study tests whether Americans’ exposure to posts from political elites is best explained by their partisan allegiance (homophily) or the intensity of their political engagement. To test this question, we employ data from a 2020 Cooperative Election Study module that asks respondents how often they encounter social media posts from various political figures. We find that both homophily and intensity characterize exposure to elite messages: partisans and ideologues not only tend to encounter posts from politicians on their own side of the aisle most often, but they also encounter posts from politicians on the opposite side more often than do independent or moderate respondents. The role of intensity relative to homophily is greatest for posts by former President Donald Trump, which Democrats were more likely to encounter than Republicans or independents.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":"63 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135967025","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 : 2023-09-11DOI: 10.1177/10659129231194325
Gabriele Magni, Andrew Reynolds
Pete Buttigieg’s candidacy in the 2020 Democratic primaries caught fire more than most predicted. An openly gay man, Buttigieg is also a veteran and a Christian. Did voters penalize Buttigieg for being gay and in a same-sex relationship? Did his other traits offset voter negative bias? We conducted a survey with over 6000 likely voters during the primaries. We included a priming experiment that manipulated the salience of Buttigieg’s identity traits. We then asked respondents how much they liked Buttigieg and who they would support in a match-up between Buttigieg and Trump. Overall, voters penalized Buttigieg for being in a same-sex relationship. The penalty surprisingly increased when his religiosity was highlighted. In contrast, Buttigieg’s military background mitigated voter discrimination when he was presented as a veteran married to a man. This article reveals how double standards and heterosexism penalize gay candidates, and contributes to discussions on minority candidates and electability.
{"title":"Candidate Identity and Campaign Priming: Analyzing Voter Support for Pete Buttigieg’s Presidential Run as an Openly Gay Man","authors":"Gabriele Magni, Andrew Reynolds","doi":"10.1177/10659129231194325","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231194325","url":null,"abstract":"Pete Buttigieg’s candidacy in the 2020 Democratic primaries caught fire more than most predicted. An openly gay man, Buttigieg is also a veteran and a Christian. Did voters penalize Buttigieg for being gay and in a same-sex relationship? Did his other traits offset voter negative bias? We conducted a survey with over 6000 likely voters during the primaries. We included a priming experiment that manipulated the salience of Buttigieg’s identity traits. We then asked respondents how much they liked Buttigieg and who they would support in a match-up between Buttigieg and Trump. Overall, voters penalized Buttigieg for being in a same-sex relationship. The penalty surprisingly increased when his religiosity was highlighted. In contrast, Buttigieg’s military background mitigated voter discrimination when he was presented as a veteran married to a man. This article reveals how double standards and heterosexism penalize gay candidates, and contributes to discussions on minority candidates and electability.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135980525","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 : 2023-09-06DOI: 10.1177/10659129231194270
R. M. Alvarez, Jacob Morrier
This paper explores how politicians respond to the public salience of policy issues when determining which topics to publicly address. Using new data and state-of-the-art methodology, our study provides a fresh perspective on this fundamental question. We focus on a multi-party parliamentary system, specifically the Canadian House of Commons, with a specific emphasis on the issue of climate change. To assess the attention given by political parties to various policy issues, we analyze transcripts from the Question Period spanning from April 2006 to June 2021. To gauge the public’s level of concern for these issues, we incorporate data obtained from Google Trends. Employing an instrumental variable estimation strategy, our study causally estimates the extent to which the public salience of climate change influences elite attention. Our findings reveal that the public salience of climate change significantly influences the attention given to this issue by parties, albeit with noticeable partisan variations. Moreover, our research highlights the effectiveness of the Question Period in compelling the government to address challenging or potentially embarrassing issues. Lastly, we uncover evidence suggesting that the Liberal Party of Canada successfully increased the public salience of climate change during its tenure in government.
{"title":"Issue Responsiveness in Canadian Politics: Are Parties Responsive to the Public Salience of Climate Change in the Question Period?","authors":"R. M. Alvarez, Jacob Morrier","doi":"10.1177/10659129231194270","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231194270","url":null,"abstract":"This paper explores how politicians respond to the public salience of policy issues when determining which topics to publicly address. Using new data and state-of-the-art methodology, our study provides a fresh perspective on this fundamental question. We focus on a multi-party parliamentary system, specifically the Canadian House of Commons, with a specific emphasis on the issue of climate change. To assess the attention given by political parties to various policy issues, we analyze transcripts from the Question Period spanning from April 2006 to June 2021. To gauge the public’s level of concern for these issues, we incorporate data obtained from Google Trends. Employing an instrumental variable estimation strategy, our study causally estimates the extent to which the public salience of climate change influences elite attention. Our findings reveal that the public salience of climate change significantly influences the attention given to this issue by parties, albeit with noticeable partisan variations. Moreover, our research highlights the effectiveness of the Question Period in compelling the government to address challenging or potentially embarrassing issues. Lastly, we uncover evidence suggesting that the Liberal Party of Canada successfully increased the public salience of climate change during its tenure in government.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2023-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44832803","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 : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.1177/10659129221144248
Jae Yeon Kim, Taeku Lee
Although North Korean refugees are co-ethnics and receive extensive government support, many reports have alleged that they are discriminated against in South Korea. We theorize that this outcome is due to the contested status of North Korean refugees’ co-ethnic identity. We test this with embedded list experiments on an approximately nationally representative sample of South Koreans (n = 1418). We find that (1) South Koreans hold prejudice against North Korean refugees primarily because they believe supporting these refugees would waste government resources; (2) liberals are more likely to disagree with this belief while conservatives are ambivalent, and (3) income predicts this belief better than partisanship or ideology. Scholars have focused on native-refugee conflict cases where ethnic identity is a faultline. However, the South Korean case shows that co-ethnic refugees could be unwelcomed in a host society if political and economic factors make their co-ethnic status contested.
{"title":"Contested Identity and Prejudice Against Co-Ethnic Refugees: Evidence From South Korea","authors":"Jae Yeon Kim, Taeku Lee","doi":"10.1177/10659129221144248","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129221144248","url":null,"abstract":"Although North Korean refugees are co-ethnics and receive extensive government support, many reports have alleged that they are discriminated against in South Korea. We theorize that this outcome is due to the contested status of North Korean refugees’ co-ethnic identity. We test this with embedded list experiments on an approximately nationally representative sample of South Koreans (n = 1418). We find that (1) South Koreans hold prejudice against North Korean refugees primarily because they believe supporting these refugees would waste government resources; (2) liberals are more likely to disagree with this belief while conservatives are ambivalent, and (3) income predicts this belief better than partisanship or ideology. Scholars have focused on native-refugee conflict cases where ethnic identity is a faultline. However, the South Korean case shows that co-ethnic refugees could be unwelcomed in a host society if political and economic factors make their co-ethnic status contested.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":"76 1","pages":"1433 - 1444"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41576184","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 : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.1177/10659129221137035
Oliver Huwyler, Tomas Turner-Zwinkels, Stefanie Bailer
Interest groups seek to influence parliamentarians' actions by establishing exchange relationships. We scrutinize the role of exchange by investigating how interest groups impact parliamentarians' use of individual parliamentary instruments such as questions, motions, and bills. We utilize a new longitudinal dataset (2000-2015) with 524 Swiss parliamentarians, their 6342 formal ties to interest groups (i.e., board seats), and a variety of 23,750 parliamentary instruments across 15 policy areas. This enables us to show that interest groups systematically relate to parliamentarians' use of parliamentary instruments in the respective policy areas in which they operate-even when parliamentarians' time-invariant (fixed effects) and time-variant personal affinities (occupation, committee membership) to the policy area are accounted for. Personal affinities heavily moderate interest groups' impact on their board members' parliamentary activities. Moreover, once formal ties end, the impact of interest groups also wanes. These findings have implications for our understanding of how interest groups foster representation in legislatures.
{"title":"No Representation Without Compensation: The Effect of Interest Groups on Legislators' Policy Area Focus.","authors":"Oliver Huwyler, Tomas Turner-Zwinkels, Stefanie Bailer","doi":"10.1177/10659129221137035","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129221137035","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Interest groups seek to influence parliamentarians' actions by establishing exchange relationships. We scrutinize the role of exchange by investigating how interest groups impact parliamentarians' use of individual parliamentary instruments such as questions, motions, and bills. We utilize a new longitudinal dataset (2000-2015) with 524 Swiss parliamentarians, their 6342 formal ties to interest groups (i.e., board seats), and a variety of 23,750 parliamentary instruments across 15 policy areas. This enables us to show that interest groups systematically relate to parliamentarians' use of parliamentary instruments in the respective policy areas in which they operate-even when parliamentarians' time-invariant (fixed effects) and time-variant personal affinities (occupation, committee membership) to the policy area are accounted for. Personal affinities heavily moderate interest groups' impact on their board members' parliamentary activities. Moreover, once formal ties end, the impact of interest groups also wanes. These findings have implications for our understanding of how interest groups foster representation in legislatures.</p>","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":"76 3","pages":"1388-1402"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/3d/2b/10.1177_10659129221137035.PMC10415157.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10305116","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.1177/10659129221119986
E. Chung, Anna O. Pechenkina, K. Skinner
International rivals often employ foreign aid to shape international institutions and alliances. This paper asks whether Americans are more supportive of allocating aid to Latin America when they learn about China’s aid programs in the region. Since the average citizen lacks detailed knowledge about foreign policy, communication frames could influence citizens’ support for aid. We, therefore, examine how various framing devices (national pride, humanitarian value, and instrumental value) affect public support for aid. Drawing on social psychology’s model of self-identifying with a group, we argue that one’s awareness of donor competition should boost support for aid. We innovate by using two dependent variables: support for giving US aid and the willingness to donate one’s own resources. A survey experiment with a high-quality sample of 2700 respondents reveals that rivalry has a different effect on these dependent variables: informing respondents of donor rivalry increases support for US aid but has no effect on respondents’ willingness to donate their own reward. Additionally, exposing subjects to the combination of rivalry and all three frames boosts approval for using tax dollars as aid; however, only national pride and humanitarian value appeals strengthen the respondents’ willingness to donate their own earnings.
{"title":"Competitors in Aid: How International Rivalry Affects Public Support for Aid Under Various Frames","authors":"E. Chung, Anna O. Pechenkina, K. Skinner","doi":"10.1177/10659129221119986","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129221119986","url":null,"abstract":"International rivals often employ foreign aid to shape international institutions and alliances. This paper asks whether Americans are more supportive of allocating aid to Latin America when they learn about China’s aid programs in the region. Since the average citizen lacks detailed knowledge about foreign policy, communication frames could influence citizens’ support for aid. We, therefore, examine how various framing devices (national pride, humanitarian value, and instrumental value) affect public support for aid. Drawing on social psychology’s model of self-identifying with a group, we argue that one’s awareness of donor competition should boost support for aid. We innovate by using two dependent variables: support for giving US aid and the willingness to donate one’s own resources. A survey experiment with a high-quality sample of 2700 respondents reveals that rivalry has a different effect on these dependent variables: informing respondents of donor rivalry increases support for US aid but has no effect on respondents’ willingness to donate their own reward. Additionally, exposing subjects to the combination of rivalry and all three frames boosts approval for using tax dollars as aid; however, only national pride and humanitarian value appeals strengthen the respondents’ willingness to donate their own earnings.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":"76 1","pages":"1371 - 1387"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42213070","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：