Suchergebnisse

"The timing of early state formation varies across the world. Inspired by Jared Diamond's seminal work, the authors employ large-n statistics to demonstrate how this variation has been structured by prehistoric biogeographical conditions, which have influenced the timing of the transition from hunter/ gatherer production to agriculture and, in turn, the timing of state formation. Biogeography structures both the extent to which societies have invented agriculture and state technology de novo, and the extent to which these inventions have diffused from adjacent societies. Importantly, they demonstrate how these prehistoric processes have continued to shape state formation by influencing the relative competitiveness of states until the near present." (author's abstract)

The COVID-19 pandemic has led governments to instate a large number of restrictions on and recommendations for citizens' behavior. One widely used tool for measuring compliance with these strictures are nationally representative surveys that ask citizens to self-report their behavior. But if respondents avoid disclosing socially undesirable behaviors, such as not complying with government strictures in a public health crisis, estimates of compliance will be biased upwards. To assess the magnitude of this problem, this study compares measures of compliance from direct questions to those estimated from list-experiments - a response technique that allows respondents to report illicit behaviors without individual-level detection. Implementing the list-experiment in two separate surveys of Danish citizens (n>5,000), we find no evidence that citizens under-report non-compliant behavior. We therefore conclude that survey estimates of compliance with COVID-19 regulations do not suffer from social desirability bias.

Public attitudes towards welfare policy are often explained by political values and perceptions of deservingness of welfare recipients. This article addresses how the impact of values and perceptions varies depending on the contextual information that citizens have available when forming welfare opinions. It is argued that whenever citizens face deservingness-relevant cues in public debate or the media, a psychological 'deservingness heuristic' is triggered prompting individuals spontaneously to think about welfare policy in terms of who deserves help. This is an automatic process, equally influential among the least and the most politically sophisticated. Moreover, when clear deservingness cues are present, the impact of values on opinions vanishes. These arguments are supported by data from two novel experimental studies embedded in separate nationwide opinion surveys. The findings revise conventional wisdom of how values and heuristics influence public opinion and have major implications for understanding dynamics in aggregate welfare opinion and attempts from political elites to manipulate public opinion. Adapted from the source document.