Election Outcome and Tax Compliance: The Role of Political Party Affiliation, Affect Balance, and Trust in Government. Nicholas C. Hunt, Govind S. Iyer, Peggy Jimenez. Applied Psychology, https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12165
Abstract: The present study examines partisan reactions to Presidential election outcomes. Our model investigates the interactive role of political party affiliation on the relationship between identification with the winning party and affect balance. We subsequently examine how tax compliance intentions are influenced by this moderation relationship through affect balance and trust in government. We conducted a quasi‐experiment one week prior to the first mass 2016 presidential primary, where 12 of the 50 U.S. states voted to decide which candidates would represent the republican and democratic parties in the 2016 U.S. Presidential election. Our sample consisted of 205 Republicans and Democrats. We manipulated press releases showing various presidential candidates winning the presidency to examine how matches / mismatches between partisans’ political party affiliation and the party winning the election influence citizens’ overall feelings, beliefs, and intentions. We find election outcomes generate significant overall positive or negative feelings (i.e. affect balance) among partisans, which influences beliefs about trust in government, and subsequently their tax compliance intentions. Political party moderates the relationship between election outcomes and affect balance in such a way that democrats experience greater overall positive affect balance when their party wins the election compared to republicans.
Tuesday, August 21, 2018
For girls, sought-after schools reduce teen motherhood, increase educational attainment, increase earnings, & improve health; for boys, the results are mixed
Do Parents Know Best? The Short and Long-Run Effects of Attending The Schools that Parents Prefer. Diether W. Beuermann, C. Kirabo Jackson. NBER Working Paper No. 24920. www.nber.org/papers/w24920
Abstract: Recent studies document that, in many cases, sought after schools do not improve student test scores. Three explanations are that (i) existing studies identify local average treatment effects that do not generalize to the average student, (ii) parents cannot discern schools’ causal impacts, and (iii) parents value schools that improve outcomes not well measured by test scores. To shed light on this, we employ administrative and survey data from Barbados. Using discrete choice models, we document that most parents have strong preferences for the same schools. Using a regression-discontinuity design, we estimate the causal impact of attending a preferred school on a broad array of outcomes. As found in other settings, preferred schools have better peers, but do not improve short-run test scores. We implement a new statistical test and find that this null effect is not due to school impacts being different for marginal students than for the average student. Looking at longer-run outcomes, for girls, preferred schools reduce teen motherhood, increase educational attainment, increase earnings, and improve health. In contrast, for boys, the results are mixed. The pattern for girls is consistent with parents valuing school impacts on outcomes not well measured by test scores, while the pattern for boys is consistent with parents being unable to identify schools’ causal impacts. Our results indicate that impacts on test scores may be an incomplete measure of school quality.
Abstract: Recent studies document that, in many cases, sought after schools do not improve student test scores. Three explanations are that (i) existing studies identify local average treatment effects that do not generalize to the average student, (ii) parents cannot discern schools’ causal impacts, and (iii) parents value schools that improve outcomes not well measured by test scores. To shed light on this, we employ administrative and survey data from Barbados. Using discrete choice models, we document that most parents have strong preferences for the same schools. Using a regression-discontinuity design, we estimate the causal impact of attending a preferred school on a broad array of outcomes. As found in other settings, preferred schools have better peers, but do not improve short-run test scores. We implement a new statistical test and find that this null effect is not due to school impacts being different for marginal students than for the average student. Looking at longer-run outcomes, for girls, preferred schools reduce teen motherhood, increase educational attainment, increase earnings, and improve health. In contrast, for boys, the results are mixed. The pattern for girls is consistent with parents valuing school impacts on outcomes not well measured by test scores, while the pattern for boys is consistent with parents being unable to identify schools’ causal impacts. Our results indicate that impacts on test scores may be an incomplete measure of school quality.
The idea of the media as immoral, government-controlled and manipulative is essentially rooted in populist attitudes rather than in left-wing or right-wing attitudes; these people are not only angry, but also more politically active and do more often express their opinion in the media
Johanna Schindler, Claudia Fortkord, Lone Posthumus, Magdalena Obermaier, Nayla, Fawzi, Carsten Reinemann, Where does media hostility lead from? On the connection between populist attitudes, media hostility, negative emotions and participation (title autamtically translated from: Woher kommt und wozu führt Medienfeindlichkeit? Zum Zusammenhang von populistischen Einstellungen, Medienfeindlichkeit, negativen Emotionen und Partizipation) in: M&K Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, Seite 283 - 301. M&K, Jahrgang 66 (2018), Heft 3, ISSN print: 1615-634X, ISSN online: 1615-634X, DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2018-3-283
Abstract: Sensing an increase in hate speech and physical aggression against journalists, we see a new level of hostility towards the media, and with it potentially far-reaching consequences for society in general. However, little is known so far about both the individual causes of media hostility and its influence on individual media-related emotions and behaviour. We set out to determine the influence of populist attitudes, i.e. the significance of the idea of a homogenous, ‘good’ people v an ‘evil’ elite on media hostility. Our study, moreover, examines the broader consequence of hostile attitudes towards the media. Drawing on data from an online survey with 1,102 participants, we show how the idea of the media as immoral, government-controlled and manipulative is essentially rooted in populist attitudes rather than in left-wing or right-wing attitudes. The effects of populist attitudes on the level of media hostility can be seen to be mediated partially by the level of the perceived representation of participants’ own interests in the media, and by the use of alternative media. People showing hostile attitudes towards the media are not only angry, but they are also more politically active and do more often express their opinion in the media.
Abstract: Sensing an increase in hate speech and physical aggression against journalists, we see a new level of hostility towards the media, and with it potentially far-reaching consequences for society in general. However, little is known so far about both the individual causes of media hostility and its influence on individual media-related emotions and behaviour. We set out to determine the influence of populist attitudes, i.e. the significance of the idea of a homogenous, ‘good’ people v an ‘evil’ elite on media hostility. Our study, moreover, examines the broader consequence of hostile attitudes towards the media. Drawing on data from an online survey with 1,102 participants, we show how the idea of the media as immoral, government-controlled and manipulative is essentially rooted in populist attitudes rather than in left-wing or right-wing attitudes. The effects of populist attitudes on the level of media hostility can be seen to be mediated partially by the level of the perceived representation of participants’ own interests in the media, and by the use of alternative media. People showing hostile attitudes towards the media are not only angry, but they are also more politically active and do more often express their opinion in the media.
Gender equality & sex differences in personality, & evidence from a large, multi-national sample: Bigger differences when gender equality is greater
Gender equality and sex differences in personality: evidence from a large, multi-national sample. Tim Kaiser, Univ of Salzburg. July 2018. DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/6NUHX
Aim: findings on sex differences in personality are robust and stable across countries. Previous studies have also shown that these differences are greater in countries with greater gender equality. However, earlier studies have shortcomings as they either (a) did not use valid indicators of gender equality and development, (b) only studied broad domains of personality, (c) did not address issues of measurement invariance. The aim of this study is to replicate previous findings on the correlation between gender equality and sex differences in a methodologically robust way. Method: a large, multinational (N = 926,383) dataset was used to examine sex differences in Big Five facet scores for 70 countries. Difference scores were aggregated to a multivariate effect size (Mahalanobis' D).
Results: effect sizes were large (average D = 1.96), but varied across countries. Countries' difference scores were related to an index of gender equality, revealing a positive weighted correlation of r = .335.
Conclusion: using multivariate effect sizes derived from latent scores with invariance constraints, the study of sex differences in personality becomes more robust und replicable. Sex differences in personality should not be interpreted as results of unequal treatment, but as indicator of successful gender equality policies.
Aim: findings on sex differences in personality are robust and stable across countries. Previous studies have also shown that these differences are greater in countries with greater gender equality. However, earlier studies have shortcomings as they either (a) did not use valid indicators of gender equality and development, (b) only studied broad domains of personality, (c) did not address issues of measurement invariance. The aim of this study is to replicate previous findings on the correlation between gender equality and sex differences in a methodologically robust way. Method: a large, multinational (N = 926,383) dataset was used to examine sex differences in Big Five facet scores for 70 countries. Difference scores were aggregated to a multivariate effect size (Mahalanobis' D).
Results: effect sizes were large (average D = 1.96), but varied across countries. Countries' difference scores were related to an index of gender equality, revealing a positive weighted correlation of r = .335.
Conclusion: using multivariate effect sizes derived from latent scores with invariance constraints, the study of sex differences in personality becomes more robust und replicable. Sex differences in personality should not be interpreted as results of unequal treatment, but as indicator of successful gender equality policies.
Many studies have revealed the existence of intimate partner violence among lesbian and gay couples, & its incidence is comparable to (Turell, 2000) or higher than that among heterosexual couples (Messinger, 2011; Kelley et al., 2012)
When Intimate Partner Violence Meets Same Sex Couples: A Review of Same Sex Intimate Partner Violence. Luca Rollè, Giulia Giardina, Angela M. Caldarera, Eva Gerino and Piera Brustia. Front. Psychol., August 21 2018. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01506
Abstract: Over the past few decades, the causes of and intervention for intimate partner violence (IPV) have been approached and studied. This paper presents a narrative review on IPV occurring in same sex couples, that is, same sex IPV (SSIPV). Despite the myth that IPV is exclusively an issue in heterosexual relationships, many studies have revealed the existence of IPV among lesbian and gay couples, and its incidence is comparable to (Turell, 2000) or higher than that among heterosexual couples (Messinger, 2011; Kelley et al., 2012). While similarities between heterosexual and lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) IPV were found, unique features and dynamics were present in LGB IPV. Such features are mainly related to identification and treatment of SSIPV in the community and to the need of taking into consideration the role of sexual minority stressors. Our findings show there is a lack of studies that address LGB individuals involved in IPV; this is mostly due to the silence that has historically existed around violence in the LGB community, a silence built on fears and myths that have obstructed a public discussion on the phenomenon. We identified the main themes discussed in the published studies that we have reviewed here. The reviews lead us to the conclusion that it is essential to create a place where this subject can be freely discussed and approached, both by LGB and heterosexual people.
Abstract: Over the past few decades, the causes of and intervention for intimate partner violence (IPV) have been approached and studied. This paper presents a narrative review on IPV occurring in same sex couples, that is, same sex IPV (SSIPV). Despite the myth that IPV is exclusively an issue in heterosexual relationships, many studies have revealed the existence of IPV among lesbian and gay couples, and its incidence is comparable to (Turell, 2000) or higher than that among heterosexual couples (Messinger, 2011; Kelley et al., 2012). While similarities between heterosexual and lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) IPV were found, unique features and dynamics were present in LGB IPV. Such features are mainly related to identification and treatment of SSIPV in the community and to the need of taking into consideration the role of sexual minority stressors. Our findings show there is a lack of studies that address LGB individuals involved in IPV; this is mostly due to the silence that has historically existed around violence in the LGB community, a silence built on fears and myths that have obstructed a public discussion on the phenomenon. We identified the main themes discussed in the published studies that we have reviewed here. The reviews lead us to the conclusion that it is essential to create a place where this subject can be freely discussed and approached, both by LGB and heterosexual people.
Thirsty participants in a dictator's game share water more often equally with powerless, anonymous others than they do money, even when they earned both types of rewards previously; so that altruistic behavior is more likely to occur when it comes to sharing primary rewards
How selfish is a thirsty man? A pilot study on comparing sharing behavior with primary and secondary rewards. Astrid Kause, Oliver Vitouch, Judith Glück. PLOS One, August 20, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0201358
Abstract: Human social interactions in daily life involve sharing various types of rewards. Previous research evolving around issues of selfish versus altruistic behavior indicates that when individuals share rewards like money with powerless others, some are purely selfish while a substantial number shares evenly. It is, however, mostly unknown how they share primary rewards like water, compared to secondary rewards like money. We adopt the widely studied Dictator Game for comparing water to be divided among study participants with a monetary reward. We show that thirsty participants share water more often equally with powerless, anonymous others than they do money. This is the case even when they earned both types of rewards in a preceding task. Results indicate that altruistic behavior is more likely to occur when it comes to sharing primary rewards. The ecologically more valid scenario employed in this study provides initial evidence that the concept of a self-interested homo economicus might not apply to everyday social interactions involving rewards other than money.
Abstract: Human social interactions in daily life involve sharing various types of rewards. Previous research evolving around issues of selfish versus altruistic behavior indicates that when individuals share rewards like money with powerless others, some are purely selfish while a substantial number shares evenly. It is, however, mostly unknown how they share primary rewards like water, compared to secondary rewards like money. We adopt the widely studied Dictator Game for comparing water to be divided among study participants with a monetary reward. We show that thirsty participants share water more often equally with powerless, anonymous others than they do money. This is the case even when they earned both types of rewards in a preceding task. Results indicate that altruistic behavior is more likely to occur when it comes to sharing primary rewards. The ecologically more valid scenario employed in this study provides initial evidence that the concept of a self-interested homo economicus might not apply to everyday social interactions involving rewards other than money.
We analyzed people’s ratings of whiskies featured at different serial positions in the tastings; we found a recency effect: people gave their highest rating to whiskies in the last position, and voted the last whisky as their favorite more frequently
In the real world, people prefer their last whisky when tasting options in a long sequence. Adele Quigley-McBride et al. PLOS One, August 20, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0202732
Abstract: When people in laboratory studies sample products in a sequence, they tend to prefer options presented first and last. To what extent do these primacy and recency effects carry over to real-world settings where numerous sources of information determine preferences? To investigate this question, we coded archival data from 136 actual whisky tastings each featuring seven whiskies. We analyzed people’s ratings of whiskies featured at different serial positions in the tastings. We found a recency effect: people gave their highest rating to whiskies in the last position, and voted the last whisky as their favorite more frequently. This recency effect persisted when we controlled for the counter explanation that whiskies with higher alcohol content tended to occupy later serial positions. The recency effect also persisted when we controlled for the age of the whiskies. Taken together, our findings suggest that the order of presentation matters in real-world settings, closely resembling what happens in laboratory settings with longer sequences of options.
Abstract: When people in laboratory studies sample products in a sequence, they tend to prefer options presented first and last. To what extent do these primacy and recency effects carry over to real-world settings where numerous sources of information determine preferences? To investigate this question, we coded archival data from 136 actual whisky tastings each featuring seven whiskies. We analyzed people’s ratings of whiskies featured at different serial positions in the tastings. We found a recency effect: people gave their highest rating to whiskies in the last position, and voted the last whisky as their favorite more frequently. This recency effect persisted when we controlled for the counter explanation that whiskies with higher alcohol content tended to occupy later serial positions. The recency effect also persisted when we controlled for the age of the whiskies. Taken together, our findings suggest that the order of presentation matters in real-world settings, closely resembling what happens in laboratory settings with longer sequences of options.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
