Abstract:

In countries with well-developed welfare state systems, it is often claimed that racial or ethnic minorities impose a heavy burden on social assistance programs without contributing to public goods. In this study, we consider the attitudinal effects of anecdotal reports of tax cheating by minorities. We conduct survey experiments in France and the United States to assess if people react more harshly to tax fraud perpetrated by members of a minority rather than the majority group. We find no evidence that minority status affects judgments and perceptions about tax fraud, including among those on the right end of the political spectrum. Tax fraud is considered unacceptable regardless of the culprit's origin.

Abstract:

Governments routinely offer deals to companies accused of white-collar crimes, allowing them to escape criminal charges in exchange for fines or penalties. This lets prosecutors avoid costly litigation and protects companies’ right to bid on lucrative public contracts, which can reduce the likelihood of bankruptcies or layoffs. Striking deals with white-collar criminals can be risky for governments because it could affect the perceived legitimacy of the legal system. This article explores the conditions under which the general public supports leniency agreements. Building on theoretical intuitions from the literature, we identify three characteristics that could affect mass attitudes: home bias, economic incentives, and retribution. We conduct a survey experiment in the United States and find moderate support for leniency agreements. Whether the crime occurs on US soil or abroad does not affect public opinion, and the number of jobs that would be jeopardized by criminal prosecution only has a small effect. Instead, survey respondents become much more supportive of a deal when it includes criminal charges for the corporate managers who were personally involved in the alleged wrongdoing. In the court of public opinion, punishing a handful of individuals appears to matter more than saving thousands of jobs

Abstract:

In late 2017, the first unified Republican government in 10 years enacted the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which cut taxes for corporations and the wealthy. Why did so many citizens support a policy that primarily benefited people richer than them? The self-interest hypothesis holds that individuals act upon the position they occupy in the income distribution: richer (poorer) taxpayers should favor (oppose) regressive policy. Associations between income and policy preferences are often inconsistent, however, suggesting that many citizens fail to connect their self-interest to taxation. Indeed, political psychologists have shown compellingly that citizens can be guided by partisan considerations not necessarily aligned with their own interests. This article assesses public support for the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017. Using data from the 2018 Cooperative Congressional Election Study as well as contemporaneous ANES and VOTER surveys to replicate our analyses, we show that self-interest and partisanship both come into play, but that partisanship matters more. Personal financial considerations, while less influential than party identification, are relevant for two groups of individuals: Republicans and the politically unsophisticated.

Abstract:

In a seminal article, Blais et al. (2003) demonstrate that local candidates mattered for about five percent of voters in the 2000 Canadian federal election. This study’s reliance on a single election raises external validity concerns. We replicate Blais et al.’s original analyses on four elections from 2000 to 2008 using a decade’s worth of data from the Canadian Elections Study. The local candidate effect first uncovered by Blais et al. is not specific to a single election. Local candidates are a decisive consideration for about 5 to 8 percent of voters outside Québec, and 2 to 5 percent of voters in Québec.

Abstract:

An important body of literature shows that citizens evaluate elected officials based on their past performance. In the aftermath of the 2020 presidential election, the conventional wisdom in both media and academic discourse was that Donald Trump would have been a two-term president absent an unprecedented, global force majeure. In this research note, we address a simple question: did exposure to COVID-19 impact vote choice in the 2020 presidential election? Using data from the Cooperative Election Study, we find that Trump’s vote share decreased because of COVID-19. However, there is no evidence suggesting that Joe Biden loses the election when no voter reports exposure to coronavirus cases and deaths. These negligible effects are found at both the national and state levels, and are robust to an exhaustive set of confounders across model specifications.

Abstract:

The SARS-CoV-2 virus was first identified in Wuhan, China, in late December 2019, and it quickly spread to many countries. By March 2020, the virus had triggered a global pandemic (World Health Organization, 2020). In response to this crisis, governments have implemented unprecedented public health measures. The success of these policies will largely depend on the public's willingness to comply with new rules. A key factor in citizens’ willingness to comply is their understanding of the data that motivate government action. In this study, we examine how different ways of presenting these data visually can affect citizen's perceptions, attitudes and support for public policy.

Abstract:

The social sciences face a replicability crisis. A key determinant of replication success is statistical power. We assess the power of political science research by collating over 16,000 hypothesis tests from about 2,000 articles. Using generous assumptions, we find that the median analysis has about 10% power and that only about 1 in 10 tests have at least 80% power to detect the consensus effects reported in the literature. We also find substantial heterogeneity in tests across research areas, with some being characterized by high power, but most having very low power. To contextualize our findings, we survey political methodologists to assess their expectations about power levels. Most methodologists greatly overestimate the statistical power of political science research.

Abstract:

On August 2021, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau dissolved Parliament, triggering a snap election two years ahead of schedule. This decision sparked controversy among not only opposition parties, but also many members of Trudeau’s Liberal Party. In this paper, we examine voters’ reactions to this snap election. We conduct a survey experiment during the 2021 Canadian federal election campaign to measure the extent to which voters were influenced by information about the fixed election law and the argument that the election call was opportunistic and unnecessary. While some respondents, particularly Liberals, moderately responded to new information, our treatments overall did little to influence views about the snap election. However, we show that negative attitudes toward the election call were a decisive consideration for many voters, inflicting an electoral cost to the incumbent Liberal Party which likely deprived it from a legislative majority.

Abstract:

Undocumented immigrants contribute to the US economy by participating in the labor force, paying taxes, and starting businesses. They do so under constant fear of deportation and while being barred from government assistance programs. Correcting misconceptions about how illegal immigration affects the job market and public finance could be pivotal in passing immigration reform. This study tests two strategies for achieving this goal: factual information and anecdotal narratives. Both increase pro-immigrant views, although fact-checking proves less successful than testimonials of “hard-working” immigrants. When prompted to consider human capital and economic output, both Democrats and Republicans are willing to overlook immigrants' nationality and legal or illegal status. Some narratives are more effective than others, with economic contributions consistently yielding more positive reactions. These findings have important implications for the study of political persuasion and prejudice reduction. 

Abstract:

Across the Western world, economic inequality has increased in recent decades, coinciding with similar upward trends in ethno-racial diversity. While demand for redistribution might be expected to increase, changing demographics should hinder the expansion of the welfare state. This paper examines these dynamics by pairing a decade of national public opinion surveys and census data for 200,000 individuals, including a panel of 8,000 respondents who were interviewed in both 2012 and 2014. Changes in neighborhood diversity do not significantly impact preferences for tax and spending policies. This null result clashes with established findings on intergroup conflict and public finance.