Separated by Politics? Disentangling the Dimensions of Discrimination

Democratic commitment in the Middle East: a conjoint analysis

“…The several choices demonstrate the underlying preferences that they are suspected of concealing in direct questions. The method is less subject to intentional bias because it conceals the motives for individual choices (Hainmueller et al, 2014b;Theodoridis et al, 2022). Thus, the multiple choices can expose a latent preference against or neutrality toward states that restrict elections or other opportunities for political engagement, compared to states that include elections and free participation.…”

“…Conjoint analysis has proliferated in political science. Researchers use it to study voters' candidate preferences (Hainmueller et al, 2014b;Franchino and Zucchini 2015;Carnes and Lupu, 2016;Shockley and Gengler, 2020;Badas and Simas 2022), party leaders' candidate preferences (Doherty et al, 2019), partisan discrimination (Theodoridis et al, 2022), disaster response preferences (Bechtel and Mannino, 2022), issue importance in policy bundles (Horiuchi et al, 2018), Brexit strategies (Hobolt et al, 2020), immigration preferences (Hainmueller et al, 2014a(Hainmueller et al, , 2014b, and bureaucrats' constituent preferences (Adam et al, 2021). Graham and Svolik (2020) look at Americans' democratic commitment by comparing the effect of candidates' ideologies and their anti-democratic policy preferences on voters' choices.…”

“…The conjoint approach more readily "simulates real-life decision tasks, when people have to trade off features or attributes, one against another" (Shamir and Shamir, 1995, 109). 9 The conjoint design also helps reduce intentional bias, such as social desirability bias, and cheap talk (Hainmueller et al, 2014b;Theodoridis et al, 2022). It is easy for a respondent to say that every feature is valuable.…”