Samara Klar, Yanna Krupnikov, John Barry Ryan; Affective Polarization or Partisan Disdain?: Untangling a Dislike for the Opposing Party from a Dislike of Partisanship, Public Opinion Quarterly, , nfy014, https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfy014
Abstract: Recent scholarship suggests that American partisans dislike other party members so much that partisanship has become the main social divide in modern politics. We argue that at least one measure of this “affective polarization” conflates a dislike for members of the other party with a dislike for partisanship in general. The measure asks people how they feel about their child marrying someone from another party. What seems like negative affect toward the other party is, in fact, negative affect toward partisans from either side of the aisle and political discussion in general. Relying on two national experiments, we demonstrate that although some Americans are politically polarized, more simply want to avoid talking about politics. In fact, many people do not want their child to marry someone from their own party if that hypothetical in-law were to discuss politics frequently. Supplementary analyses using ANES feeling thermometers show that inparty feeling thermometer ratings have decreased in recent years among weak and leaning partisans. As a result, the feeling thermometer results confirm the conclusion from the experiments. Polarization is a phenomenon concentrated in the one-third of Americans who consider themselves strong partisans. More individuals are averse to partisan politics. The analyses demonstrate how affective polarization exists alongside weakening partisan identities.
Thursday, May 17, 2018
What seems like negative affect toward the other party is, in fact, negative affect toward partisans from either side of the aisle and political discussion in general; many people do not want their child to marry someone from their own party if that hypothetical in-law were to discuss politics frequently
Health studies among humorists shows susceptibility to contagious diseases among improvisational artists: Found no evidence that humor positively contributes to health, and a career in a humor-related profession may be detrimental to one’s health
Health among humorists: Susceptibility to contagious diseases among improvisational artists. Gil Greengross, Rod A. Martin. Humor, https://doi.org/10.1515/humor-2017-0054
Abstract: There is a widely held belief that humor contributes to better health, but the research on this topic yields mixed results. To assess the relationship between humor and health, we compared the susceptibility to various infectious diseases of 511 comedy performers (amateur improvisational artists) and a control group of 795 non-performers that were matched to the comedy performers sample in age and sex. Subjects reported the number of episodes and the total days they had had various infectious diseases. Contrary to the prevailing sentiment that humor boosts health, results showed that the comedy performer group reported more frequent contagious diseases and more days having these infections diseases, compared to the control group. Improv artists had significantly more infections and reported more days infected than the control group on respiratory infections, head colds, stomach or intestinal flu, skin infections, and autoimmune diseases. The control group had significantly more bladder infections with non-significant difference on days infected. Results held after controlling for BMI, age, number of antibiotics used and neuroticism. We found no evidence that humor positively contributes to health, and a career in a humor-related profession may be detrimental to one’s health. Our research highlights the complex relationship between humor and health outcomes.
Keywords: humor; physical health; improvisational artists; stand-up comedy; infectious diseases
Abstract: There is a widely held belief that humor contributes to better health, but the research on this topic yields mixed results. To assess the relationship between humor and health, we compared the susceptibility to various infectious diseases of 511 comedy performers (amateur improvisational artists) and a control group of 795 non-performers that were matched to the comedy performers sample in age and sex. Subjects reported the number of episodes and the total days they had had various infectious diseases. Contrary to the prevailing sentiment that humor boosts health, results showed that the comedy performer group reported more frequent contagious diseases and more days having these infections diseases, compared to the control group. Improv artists had significantly more infections and reported more days infected than the control group on respiratory infections, head colds, stomach or intestinal flu, skin infections, and autoimmune diseases. The control group had significantly more bladder infections with non-significant difference on days infected. Results held after controlling for BMI, age, number of antibiotics used and neuroticism. We found no evidence that humor positively contributes to health, and a career in a humor-related profession may be detrimental to one’s health. Our research highlights the complex relationship between humor and health outcomes.
Keywords: humor; physical health; improvisational artists; stand-up comedy; infectious diseases
Nonbelievers were less inclined to cheat than believers; prayer acted as a self-control enhancement for believers (but not nonbelievers), decreasing their cheating to the level of nonbelievers
Alogna, V. (2018). The divergent effects of prayer on cognitive performance (Thesis, Doctor of Philosophy). University of Otago. http://hdl.handle.net/10523/7963
Abstract: Prayer is a universal religious ritual, even among the secular. Although prayer is assumed to be beneficial, the empirical evidence is sparse. What rigorous research exists, concentrates on prayer’s subjective effects and correlates. There is reason to think that these subjective mechanisms could translate to objective performance, such that praying for an objective outcome might bring about that outcome (without divine intervention) through one or more cognitive mechanisms. The primary aim of this thesis was to examine prayer’s effects on cognitive performance, and the mediating mechanisms that could account for its effects.
In two experiments, one in which prayer content was controlled and another in which participants generated the content, prayer differentially affected anagram performance depending on participants’ supernatural beliefs. Believers performed better after praying than after one of several control manipulations, and the opposite was true for nonbelievers.
Several mechanisms were explored as potential mediators of these effects. In Studies 1 and 2, emotional and arousal accounts of prayer were considered. Study 1 showed that believers who prayed experienced increased arousal and positive affect, but Study 2 did not replicate these effects. Study 2 revealed initial evidence of an alternative attributional account of prayer. Believers who prayed not only performed better on the anagram task, but also reported more internal attributions of control over their performance. However, the results of Studies 3 and 4, which investigated prayer’s effects on attributions of control, in the absence of performance were inconsistent with this account. Study 3 suggested another potential mechanism, that believers who prayed perceived their prayers as more effective in improving their performance. However, expectancy perceptions did not translate into predictions about performance, casting doubt on this account. Study 5 examined two alternative mechanisms; social influence and self-control. Preliminary results did not support a social influence account of prayer. However, results showed initial support for a self-control account of prayer, with prayer increasing the ability to forgo immediate rewards as religiosity increased. Study 6 investigated prayer’s effects on cheating, an activity associated with self-control. Overall, nonbelievers were less inclined to cheat than believers. Prayer acted as a self-control enhancement for believers (but not nonbelievers), decreasing their cheating to the level of nonbelievers.
Despite a number of limitations, most notably the absence evidence for a complete causal model, the six studies together provide a number of basic experimental and correlational findings regarding the relationship between religious belief, prayer, and performance. Future research should investigate the replicability and generalizability of these results.
Abstract: Prayer is a universal religious ritual, even among the secular. Although prayer is assumed to be beneficial, the empirical evidence is sparse. What rigorous research exists, concentrates on prayer’s subjective effects and correlates. There is reason to think that these subjective mechanisms could translate to objective performance, such that praying for an objective outcome might bring about that outcome (without divine intervention) through one or more cognitive mechanisms. The primary aim of this thesis was to examine prayer’s effects on cognitive performance, and the mediating mechanisms that could account for its effects.
In two experiments, one in which prayer content was controlled and another in which participants generated the content, prayer differentially affected anagram performance depending on participants’ supernatural beliefs. Believers performed better after praying than after one of several control manipulations, and the opposite was true for nonbelievers.
Several mechanisms were explored as potential mediators of these effects. In Studies 1 and 2, emotional and arousal accounts of prayer were considered. Study 1 showed that believers who prayed experienced increased arousal and positive affect, but Study 2 did not replicate these effects. Study 2 revealed initial evidence of an alternative attributional account of prayer. Believers who prayed not only performed better on the anagram task, but also reported more internal attributions of control over their performance. However, the results of Studies 3 and 4, which investigated prayer’s effects on attributions of control, in the absence of performance were inconsistent with this account. Study 3 suggested another potential mechanism, that believers who prayed perceived their prayers as more effective in improving their performance. However, expectancy perceptions did not translate into predictions about performance, casting doubt on this account. Study 5 examined two alternative mechanisms; social influence and self-control. Preliminary results did not support a social influence account of prayer. However, results showed initial support for a self-control account of prayer, with prayer increasing the ability to forgo immediate rewards as religiosity increased. Study 6 investigated prayer’s effects on cheating, an activity associated with self-control. Overall, nonbelievers were less inclined to cheat than believers. Prayer acted as a self-control enhancement for believers (but not nonbelievers), decreasing their cheating to the level of nonbelievers.
Despite a number of limitations, most notably the absence evidence for a complete causal model, the six studies together provide a number of basic experimental and correlational findings regarding the relationship between religious belief, prayer, and performance. Future research should investigate the replicability and generalizability of these results.
It is not democracy and its credible budgets leading to military strength, as in Lake 1992; rather, it is limited government leading to military strength, Weingast 1998
Cox, Gary W. and Dincecco, Mark, The Budgetary Origins of Fiscal-Military Prowess (April 13, 2018). http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3162629
Abstract: Why modern democracies tend to win the wars they fight has been much debated. In this paper, we investigate the budgetary sources of fiscal-military prowess from the mid-17th to the early 20th centuries. We first review evidence that states adopting credible budgets accrued substantial advantages in raising taxes and loans. Because victory in war has, since the early modern period, been largely a matter of out-spending one’s opponent, credible budgets have also conferred an advantage in winning wars. Using panel data on 10 major European powers, we show that credible budgets led to significantly larger wartime expenditures and thus better chances of winning. Since credible budgets could be adopted by decidedly non-democratic countries, such as England in 1689 or Prussia in 1848, ours is not a theory of democracy leading to military strength, as in the literature beginning with Lake (1992). Rather, it is a theory of limited government leading to military strength, as in Schultz and Weingast (1998).
Keywords: fiscal-military states, credible budgets, democratic victory thesis
Abstract: Why modern democracies tend to win the wars they fight has been much debated. In this paper, we investigate the budgetary sources of fiscal-military prowess from the mid-17th to the early 20th centuries. We first review evidence that states adopting credible budgets accrued substantial advantages in raising taxes and loans. Because victory in war has, since the early modern period, been largely a matter of out-spending one’s opponent, credible budgets have also conferred an advantage in winning wars. Using panel data on 10 major European powers, we show that credible budgets led to significantly larger wartime expenditures and thus better chances of winning. Since credible budgets could be adopted by decidedly non-democratic countries, such as England in 1689 or Prussia in 1848, ours is not a theory of democracy leading to military strength, as in the literature beginning with Lake (1992). Rather, it is a theory of limited government leading to military strength, as in Schultz and Weingast (1998).
Keywords: fiscal-military states, credible budgets, democratic victory thesis
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
