Partisan bias and expressive voting

Robbett, Andrea; Matthews, Peter Hans

doi:10.1016/j.jpubeco.2017.09.008

Cited by 28 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Berinsky (2018) does the same in two studies. And Robbett & Matthews (2018) ask groups of subjects to vote on the correct answers, and they vary the extent to which subjects are pivotal. In some conditions, the subject's answer will determine the group's collective decision; in others, it will not.…”

Section: The Extent Of Motivated Respondingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Partisan Bias in Surveys

Bullock

Lenz

2019

Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci.

138

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

If citizens are to hold politicians accountable for their performance, they probably must have some sense of the relevant facts, such as whether the economy is growing. In surveys, Democrats and Republicans often claim to hold different beliefs about these facts, which raises normative concerns. However, it is not clear that their divergent survey responses reflect actual divergence of beliefs. In this review, we conclude that partisan divergence in survey responses is often not due to sincere, considered differences of belief that fall along party lines—but determining what it is due to is difficult. We review the evidence for possible explanations, especially insincere responding and congenial inference. Research in this area is still nascent, and much more will be required before we can speak with precision about the causes of partisan divergence in responses to factual questions.

show abstract

Section: The Extent Of Motivated Respondingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Partisan Bias in Surveys

Bullock

Lenz

2019

Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci.

138

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We recruited our participants in September and October 2017 through a market and social research company (Online Research Unit [ORU]) with one of the largest online panels in Australia. 9 Online panels are now widely used in economics, in particular Amazon Mechanical Turk has become a standard tool to run online experiments (Weinzierl, 2017;Robbett and Matthews, 2018 Based on the eligibility criteria, a total of 1083 individuals took part in the study. We excluded 76 participants who declared being highly uncertain of whether they were among the youngest or the oldest in the classroom during primary school in the pre-experimental survey.…”

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-lasting effects of relative age at school

Page

Sarkar

Silva-Goncalves

2019

Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We investigate the long lasting effects on behaviour of relative age at school. We conduct an online incentivised survey with a sample of 1007 adults, who were born at most two months before or after the school entry cutoff date in four Australian states. We find those who were among the oldest in the classroom throughout their school years display higher self-confidence, are more willing to enter in some form of competition, declare taking more risk in a range of domains in their life and are more trusting of other people, compared to those who were among the youngest.

show abstract

“…First, in addition to being motivated by tangible outcomes, people also have a tendency to behave in an ethical manner [27]. Research on voting behavior has shown that voters obtain positive utility not only from the outcomes of the elections wherein they participate, but also by using their votes as an expression of their attitudes [28][29][30][31][32][33].…”

Section: Hypothesismentioning

confidence: 99%

Voting on Behalf of a Future Generation: A Laboratory Experiment

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper investigates a new voting rule wherein some people are given extra votes to serve as proxies for future generations. We predict that this voting scheme affects the voting behavior of those who do not receive an extra vote (i.e., single-ballot voters) because they are less likely to become a pivot, while proxy voters are expected to behave in support of the future generation. To test this prediction, we compare three scenarios wherein single-ballot voters would cast a vote: (a) one-voter-one-vote scenario wherein all voters cast only a single ballot; (b) a standard proxy-voting scenario wherein other voters cast two ballots, and the second vote is to cast for the benefit of a future generation; and (c) a non-proxy-voting scenario wherein other voters cast two ballots with no explanation for the second vote. The result shows that single-ballot voters are less inclined to vote for the future-oriented option in (c) than in (a). This indicates the potential drawback of the new voting scheme. However, there is no difference in the single-ballot voters’ decision between (a) and (b), indicating that the explanation of the second ballot as the proxy is important for reducing the intergenerational inequality through this voting reform.

show abstract

Partisan bias and expressive voting

Cited by 28 publications

References 34 publications

Partisan Bias in Surveys

Partisan Bias in Surveys

Long-lasting effects of relative age at school

Voting on Behalf of a Future Generation: A Laboratory Experiment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About