Suchergebnisse

Abstract
Social scientists employ survey methods to explore the contours of human behavior. Today there are more opportunities to collect survey data than at any time in recent history. Yet sample quality varies dramatically due in part to the availability of nonprobability samples (NPSs) from commercial survey organizations. While these kinds of surveys have advantages in terms of cost and accessibility, the proprietary nature of the data can be problematic. In this synthesis, we describe situations in which researchers typically employ NPSs and consider whether these data are fit for purpose. Next, we discuss use cases that are not widespread but may be appropriate for these data. We conclude that potential utility of NPSs will remain out of reach unless scholars confront the tension between the operation of online survey organizations and the goals of transparent research.

"Media, Electoral Accountability, and Issue Voting" published on by Oxford University Press.

Researchers use survey experiments to establish causal effects in descriptively representative samples, but concerns remain regarding the strength of the stimuli and the lack of realism in experimental settings. We explore these issues by comparing three national survey experiments on Medicare and immigration with contemporaneous natural experiments on the same topics. The survey experiments reveal that providing information increases political knowledge and alters attitudes. In contrast, two real-world government announcements had no discernable effects, except among people who were exposed to the same facts publicized in the mass media. Even among this exposed subsample, treatment effects were smaller and sometimes pointed in the opposite direction. Methodologically, our results suggest the need for caution when extrapolating from survey experiments. Substantively, we find that many citizens are able to recall factual information appearing in the news but may not adjust their beliefs and opinions in response to this information.

Policy facts are among the most relevant forms of knowledge in a democracy. Although the mass media seem like an obvious source of policy‐specific information, past research in this area has been plagued by design and methodological problems that have hindered causal inferences. Moreover, few studies include measures of media content, preventing researchers from being able to say what it is about media coverage that influences learning. We advance the literature by employing a simple but underutilized approach for estimating the causal effects of news coverage. Drawing upon a unique collection of cross‐sectional survey data, we make within‐survey/within‐subjects comparisons under conditions of high and low media coverage. We show how the volume, breadth, and prominence of news media coverage increase policy‐specific knowledge above and beyond common demographic factors.

AbstractHow do traditional redistricting principles—contiguity, communities of interest, political subdivisions, incumbent protection, Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, preservation of district core, and compactness—affect racial minority representation in congressional districts? Using data from the 2001-02 redistricting process, we find that compactness is the only principle that significantly affects minority representation, both in terms of majority-minority districts and minority influence districts, but these effects are contingent on the size of the minority community and extent of racial segregation in a state. Two other principles, Section 5 pre-clearance and protecting political subdivisions, improve minority representation in a more limited way. Thus, race-neutral redistricting criteria like the compactness principle, can dramatically affect the racial composition of the resulting districts and, thereby, affect minority representation.

How do traditional redistricting principles -- contiguity, communities of interest, political subdivisions, incumbent protection, Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, preservation of district core, & compactness -- affect racial minority representation in congressional districts? Using data from the 2001-02 redistricting process, we find that compactness is the only principle that significantly affects minority representation, both in terms of majority-minority districts & minority influence districts, but these effects are contingent on the size of the minority community & extent of racial segregation in a state. Two other principles, Section 5 pre-clearance & protecting political subdivisions, improve minority representation in a more limited way. Thus, race-neutral redistricting criteria, like the compactness principle, can dramatically affect the racial composition of the resulting districts &, thereby, affect minority representation. 2 Tables, 3 Figures, 1 Appendix, 44 References. Adapted from the source document.

AbstractManipulation checks are often advisable in experimental studies, yet they rarely appear in practice. This lack of usage may stem from fears of distorting treatment effects and uncertainty regarding which type to use (e.g., instructional manipulation checks [IMCs] or assessments of whether stimuli alter a latent independent variable of interest). Here, we first categorize the main variants and argue that factual manipulation checks (FMCs)—that is, objective questions about key elements of the experiment—can identify individual‐level attentiveness to experimental information and, as a consequence, better enable researchers to diagnose experimental findings. We then find, through four replication studies, little evidence that FMC placement affects treatment effects, and that placing FMCs immediately post‐outcome does not attenuate FMC passage rates. Additionally, FMC and IMC passage rates are only weakly related, suggesting that each technique identifies different sets of attentive subjects. Thus, unlike other methods, FMCs can confirm attentiveness to experimental protocols.