Did politicians really win approval by aligning with voters' views, or do voters accept positions regardless of agreement or justification? We tested these core questions through innovative field experiments conducted with U.S. state legislators.
Experimental Design & Context
* Partnered directly with sitting elected officials
* Conducted randomized trials in real-world political settings
* Examined official communications sent to constituents by state legislators
* Manipulated content regarding issue positions (stated or omitted)
* Compared conditions where positions aligned vs. opposed constituent views
* Varying levels of justification provided for stated positions
Key Findings & Surprises
* Constituents adopted the policy positions taken by their representatives, even when these positions were contrary to their own prior stances.
* Voters showed remarkable deference to legislators' positions regardless of whether they offered extensive justification or none at all.
* Legislators did not face negative evaluation for publicly stating positions that conflicted with voters' views.
Why This Matters
These findings challenge conventional wisdom about the relationship between elected officials and their constituents. They suggest a powerful dynamic where voter attitudes may be significantly influenced by elite position announcements, even without alignment or supporting arguments.
| The Causal Effects of Elite Position-Taking on Voter Attitudes: Field Experiments with Elite Communication was authored by David Broockman and Daniel Butler. It was published by Wiley in AJPS in 2017. |
