Article summary
This study examines perceptions of U.S. democracy's importance and performance during the first year-and-a-half of Donald Trump's presidency using original survey data from political experts and the public.
This study examines perceptions of U.S. democracy's importance and performance during the first year-and-a-half of Donald Trump's presidency using original survey data from political experts and the public.
The debate over whether racial attitudes or economic distress drove voting behavior in the 2016 presidential election has been dominated by white voters, obscuring other groups' experiences.
Building on scholarship about public opinion and democratic governance, this study uses a unique survey to test whether factual information about President Trump’s 2019–2020 impeachment influenced public attitudes.
A set of survey experiments tested whether information about the COVID-19 crisis changed citizens' support for Trump in 2020. Treatments presented respondents with evidence about the unprecedented economic downturn and with information about the U.S. public health record under the Trump administration to assess effects on electoral support.
Donald Trump's presidency sparked intense debate over whether congressional Republicans were allies or adversaries. This article examines Trump's legislative backing from two angles. First, it forecasts his Republican support using historical data (1969–2016), finding levels consistent with expectations despite media skepticism.
This research investigates the phenomenon known as 'global racist contagion', analyzing its widespread impact following Donald Trump's 2016 presidential election victory.
Recent studies suggest a link between racial animosity and political support for Donald Trump. This research delves deeper using experimental methods.
Conventional explanations for Donald Trump’s surprising electoral victory often point to his idiosyncratic campaign style and media celebrity, overlooking the crucial role of organized support. But new research reveals that the influence of conservative political groups extends beyond these factors.
Does supporting President Trump signal distinctive foreign policy views? We analyze this possibility.
Financial markets react strongly to new information about government policy direction and resolve.
This study investigates whether President Donald Trump faces audience costs for foreign policy inconsistency during the 2016 transition period. Using a novel experiment, we tested how co-partisans and opposition partisans would respond to his behaviors.
The refusal of Republican members of Congress to back their party's 2016 nominee became a defining story. This paper examines the reasons behind this movement by analyzing diverse explanations from media and categorizing them into four theoretical frameworks—policy preferences, identity politics, electoral calculations, and establishment interests. We then test these claims using empirical evidence.
Using panel data that begin before Trump’s emergence, the authors show that hostility toward groups associated with the Democratic Party measured in 2011 is associated with later support for Donald Trump, even after accounting for respondents’ party identification. That animus does not predict support for other Republican or Democratic figures, nor do anti‑Republican group sentiments predict support for Democratic elites, suggesting a distinctive link between anti–Democratic‑group attitudes and Trump loyalty.
This study investigates why long-lasting opposition developed against President Donald Trump's controversial Muslim ban, despite the information environment suggesting it should be ephemeral.
This study demonstrates that the performance of candidates in primary elections is a strong predictor of their success in general elections.
Donald Trump's celebrity status posed an unusual challenge for traditional political journalism.
The 2016 election signaled a potential shift in conservatism, but the party remains divided on its meaning. This piece explores three facets of Republican ideology—symbolic, operational, and conceptual—and analyzes how they differ among voters based on their support for Trump.
This article asks whether explicitly racial, inflammatory elite rhetoric makes prejudiced citizens more likely to express or act on their biases. Using a survey experiment tied to the 2016 Trump campaign embedded in an online panel, the authors report that prejudiced respondents typically restrained expression absent elite cues, but exposure to such elite speech—particularly when other elites tacitly condoned it—emboldened greater expression and reported willingness to act on prejudice.
During President Trump's early presidency, intense media coverage about political scandals raised questions: do these stories impact partisan opinions or just highlight issues to partisans? This study uses a unique experimental approach—randomly exposing participants to varying levels of Trump-Russia scandal headlines over one week in June 2017—to address limitations in past research. Unlike previous studies that relied on self-reported media use and single exposures, this design provides multiple contacts with the same information.
Can we really separate party loyalty from ideology in American politics? This article examines the surprising election of Donald Trump as an opportunity to disentangle these concepts. While party and ideology have been closely linked historically, Trump's presidency created a unique research design using his actual conservative/liberal policy statements.
= Abstract 
= Data 
= Details