预防两极分化:舆论形成实验

IF 4.8 1区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS Journal of Public Economics Pub Date : 2024-05-04 DOI:10.1016/j.jpubeco.2024.105122
Daniel Kashner , Mateusz Stalinski
{"title":"预防两极分化:舆论形成实验","authors":"Daniel Kashner ,&nbsp;Mateusz Stalinski","doi":"10.1016/j.jpubeco.2024.105122","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Blind adoption of opinions put forward by political parties and influential figures can sometimes be harmful. Focusing on cases where the partisan gap on policy support has not yet arisen, we investigate whether its formation can be prevented by encouraging prior active engagement with non-partisan information. To address this question, we recruited N=851 Republicans for a study about net neutrality, an issue largely unfamiliar to the electorate, which refers to equal treatment of all internet traffic. In a pre-registered experiment, we randomly changed the order in which the following two types of information were provided: (i) partisan, underscoring Republicans’ opposition and Democrats’ support, and (ii) non-partisan, where the participants evaluated factual arguments about the pros and cons of the policy. Despite holding total information constant, we find that those who saw the non-partisan block first donated 46% more to a charity advocating for net neutrality (p=0.001). The treatment effect persisted in an obfuscated follow-up study, conducted several weeks after the intervention. However, we do not find an effect on donations when repeating the main study with a sample of Democrats.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48436,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Economics","volume":"234 ","pages":"Article 105122"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272724000586/pdfft?md5=62b730927311e6cccc7e46c5bb4aa87e&pid=1-s2.0-S0047272724000586-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Preempting polarization: An experiment on opinion formation\",\"authors\":\"Daniel Kashner ,&nbsp;Mateusz Stalinski\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jpubeco.2024.105122\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Blind adoption of opinions put forward by political parties and influential figures can sometimes be harmful. Focusing on cases where the partisan gap on policy support has not yet arisen, we investigate whether its formation can be prevented by encouraging prior active engagement with non-partisan information. To address this question, we recruited N=851 Republicans for a study about net neutrality, an issue largely unfamiliar to the electorate, which refers to equal treatment of all internet traffic. In a pre-registered experiment, we randomly changed the order in which the following two types of information were provided: (i) partisan, underscoring Republicans’ opposition and Democrats’ support, and (ii) non-partisan, where the participants evaluated factual arguments about the pros and cons of the policy. Despite holding total information constant, we find that those who saw the non-partisan block first donated 46% more to a charity advocating for net neutrality (p=0.001). The treatment effect persisted in an obfuscated follow-up study, conducted several weeks after the intervention. However, we do not find an effect on donations when repeating the main study with a sample of Democrats.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48436,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Public Economics\",\"volume\":\"234 \",\"pages\":\"Article 105122\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272724000586/pdfft?md5=62b730927311e6cccc7e46c5bb4aa87e&pid=1-s2.0-S0047272724000586-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Public Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272724000586\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Public Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272724000586","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

盲目采纳政党和有影响力的人物提出的观点有时可能是有害的。针对政策支持上的党派差距尚未出现的情况,我们研究了是否可以通过鼓励事先积极接触非党派信息来防止这种差距的形成。为了解决这个问题,我们招募了 N=851 名共和党人参与一项关于网络中立性的研究。网络中立性是指平等对待所有互联网流量,对于选民来说,这是一个很陌生的问题。在预先登记的实验中,我们随机改变了以下两类信息的提供顺序:(i) 党派信息,强调共和党人的反对和民主党人的支持;(ii) 非党派信息,参与者评估有关政策利弊的事实论据。尽管总信息量保持不变,但我们发现,那些首先看到非党派区块的人对倡导网络中立的慈善机构的捐赠增加了 46%(p=0.001)。在干预几周后进行的模糊跟踪研究中,治疗效果依然存在。然而,在以民主党人为样本重复主要研究时,我们没有发现对捐赠的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Preempting polarization: An experiment on opinion formation

Blind adoption of opinions put forward by political parties and influential figures can sometimes be harmful. Focusing on cases where the partisan gap on policy support has not yet arisen, we investigate whether its formation can be prevented by encouraging prior active engagement with non-partisan information. To address this question, we recruited N=851 Republicans for a study about net neutrality, an issue largely unfamiliar to the electorate, which refers to equal treatment of all internet traffic. In a pre-registered experiment, we randomly changed the order in which the following two types of information were provided: (i) partisan, underscoring Republicans’ opposition and Democrats’ support, and (ii) non-partisan, where the participants evaluated factual arguments about the pros and cons of the policy. Despite holding total information constant, we find that those who saw the non-partisan block first donated 46% more to a charity advocating for net neutrality (p=0.001). The treatment effect persisted in an obfuscated follow-up study, conducted several weeks after the intervention. However, we do not find an effect on donations when repeating the main study with a sample of Democrats.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
14.10
自引率
2.00%
发文量
139
审稿时长
70 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Public Economics aims to promote original scientific research in the field of public economics, focusing on the utilization of contemporary economic theory and quantitative analysis methodologies. It serves as a platform for the international scholarly community to engage in discussions on public policy matters.
期刊最新文献
Who truly bears (bank) taxes? Evidence from only shifting statutory incidence From viewers to voters: Tracing Fox News’ impact on American democracy All is not lost: Organized crime and social capital formation Editorial Board Income shocks, political support and voting behaviour
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1