Policy Preferences

This article reports three pre-registered field experiments in which 230 canvassers held in-person conversations with 6,869 US voters about unauthorized immigrants and transgender people. Conversations that combined arguments with a non-judgmental exchange of personal narratives produced small but durable reductions in exclusionary attitudes (effects d ≈ 0.04–0.08), with impacts persisting for at least four months. Pure argument-only conversations showed no measurable effect.

This study asks whether people living under authoritarianism form stable, constrained preferences across multiple policy domains and whether autocratic incentives to suppress preference formation prevent such stability. Using three surveys—two longitudinal—conducted in China, the authors examine intertemporal stability in a range of policy and value areas and report that many preferences show substantial stability over month-long and year-long intervals. The paper preserves caveats about measurement and context and offers recommendations for measuring preference configuration in authoritarian settings.

This paper asks how voters form policy preferences in nonpartisan contexts by studying residential zoning reform. The author reports fieldwork on a Menlo Park, California zoning initiative and argues that local campaign messages combined ideological information with nonpartisan group cues. The paper then assesses generalizability by documenting similar information in other California zoning campaigns and conducting a survey experiment with Democratic homeowners to test how that information affects opinion.

This study asks how cross-border labor migration changes migrants’ redistribution preferences, comparing migrants themselves to their left-behind family members. Using a randomized intervention that facilitated labor migration from India to the Middle East, the authors test whether moving alters support for taxation and redistribution and explore mechanisms tied to economic gains, self-reliance, and expectations of upward mobility.

New research explores why democratic public opinion remains stable despite political volatility.

This paper asks whether voters are more tolerant of politicians’ undemocratic behavior when those politicians share voters’ partisanship or policy preferences. Using conjoint experiments run in five countries (United States, United Kingdom, Czech Republic, Mexico, South Korea), the study contrasts a social‑psychological partisan‑attachment account with Downsian spatial policy‑preference expectations to see which, if either, reduces voters’ punishment of undemocratic conduct.

Politicians and activists often use humanizing media to increase empathic concern for out-groups and thereby reduce support for punitive policies. Two experimental studies tested whether media messages that humanize Latinos succeed at (1) raising empathy and (2) changing policy attitudes among different audience segments.

This article asks how votes in sovereignty referendums translate into policy preferences about future outcomes and influence perceptions of legitimacy, using the 2016 British EU membership referendum as a case. The authors contribute by measuring how different possible Brexit negotiation outcomes were evaluated by the public and whether the referendum result provided clear guidance about what voters would prefer and regard as legitimate.

Gender stereotypes shape public perception of women's policy priorities. This study examines how female representatives challenge or conform to these biases.

This study investigates why wealthier individuals in Buenos Aires might surprisingly endorse redistribution policies, despite conventional economic expectations.

This paper examines how labor market inequality influences policy preferences in post-industrial societies. It argues that two dimensions of vulnerability - individual labor status (unemployed, temporary/contract workers or permanent employed) and occupational unemployment rates (occupations with high or low job prospects) - together determine citizens' views on the labor market.

This article examines the relationship between income and support for redistribution in Latin America.

Gender disparities persist in radical right party (RRP) voting despite similar policy preferences on key issues like immigration. This article reveals an unexpected finding: women are more motivated than men to control prejudice, particularly toward groups RRP policies might target.

Does forcing people to vote change their policy preferences?

This study explores how citizens attribute blame to political actors based on policy outcomes and whether they can distinguish between deliberate versus unintended policy surprises.

Electoral rules powerfully shape how lawmakers representing minority groups champion those interests. Using New Zealand's distinctive Mäori seats system, this study examines parliamentary behavior.

State AGs' Amicus Participation: Examined 253 U.S. Supreme Court criminal procedure cases from 1990-2001, finding AG motivation driven more by policy preferences than by electoral responsiveness.

New evidence from analyzing ECtHR dissents suggests international judges can be impartial despite personal motivations. There's no indication of cultural or geopolitical bias in rulings, but career insecurities may push some to favor their national government when involved. The strongest finding reveals that ECtHR judges act as policy seekers—varying in how they defer to member states regarding human rights implementation.