Suchergebnisse

Are individual differences in political ideology associated with inclinations to hold more or less ambivalent attitudes? Extant research on the linear association of political ideology with attitudinal ambivalence yielded inconsistent findings. The present research tested the hypotheses (a) that the association of political ideology with attitudinal ambivalence is curvilinear with lower levels of ambivalence at both extremes of the ideological spectrum and (b) that higher political interest is associated with lower levels of attitudinal ambivalence. It used data from large and demographically diverse electoral surveys in a set of three studies (Study 1: N = 13,808; Study 2: N = 6,528; Study 3: N = 4,789) that focused on attitudes toward political candidates (Studies 1 and 2) as well as political parties (Study 3) in Germany. Overall, the results support both hypotheses even when general attitudes toward the politicians and parties are controlled in the analyses.

Evidence on the association of cognitive ability with economic attitudes is mixed. We conducted a meta-analysis (k = 20, N = 46,426) to examine the relationship between objective measures of cognitive ability and economic ideology and analyzed survey data (N = 3,375) to test theoretical explanations for the association. The meta-analysis provided evidence for a small positive association with a weighted mean effect size of r = .07 (95% CI = [0.02, 0.12]), suggesting that higher cognitive ability is associated with conservative views on economic issues, but effect sizes were extremely heterogeneous. Tests using representative survey data provided support for both a positive association of cognitive ability with economic conservatism that is mediated through income as well as for a negative association that is mediated through a higher need for certainty. Hence, multiple causal mechanisms with countervailing effects might explain the low overall association of cognitive ability with economic political attitudes.

Even though economic globalization and foreign trade are major topics in the political discourse of most societies and negative attitudes toward international trade are prevalent, there is a lack of research investigating the ideological roots of protectionist preferences from a psychological perspective. In the present research, we examined the implications of right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO) for trade attitudes. Using data from two nationally representative samples from the United States (Study 1) and Germany (Study 2), we found that RWA predicted protectionist attitudes above and beyond economic self-interest. Furthermore, we found that the relationship between RWA and opposition to international trade was moderated by political involvement. The association of SDO with protectionist attitudes was inconsistent across the two studies and was not moderated by political involvement. Taken together, these results emphasize the importance of basic ideological orientations and the psychological dispositions they reflect in explaining public attitudes toward international trade.

Even though economic globalization and foreign trade are major topics in the political discourse of most societies and negative attitudes toward international trade are prevalent, there is a lack of research investigating the ideological roots of protectionist preferences from a psychological perspective. In the present research, we examined the implications of right‐wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO) for trade attitudes. Using data from two nationally representative samples from the United States (Study 1) and Germany (Study 2), we found that RWA predicted protectionist attitudes above and beyond economic self‐interest. Furthermore, we found that the relationship between RWA and opposition to international trade was moderated by political involvement. The association of SDO with protectionist attitudes was inconsistent across the two studies and was not moderated by political involvement. Taken together, these results emphasize the importance of basic ideological orientations and the psychological dispositions they reflect in explaining public attitudes toward international trade.

According to the "great replacement" conspiracy theory, mass immigration to Europe and the U.S. is part of a secret plot to replace the autochthonous White and Christian population with non-White and Muslim immigrants. With the aim of exploring psychological factors that play a role in believing in the "great replacement" theory, the present research focused on individual differences in reflective thinking. Using data from a cross-sectional study (N = 906), we found that cognitive reflection was negatively associated with belief in the "great replacement" conspiracy theory, even when political ideology and sociodemographic characteristics were controlled in the analysis. The findings highlight the key role of reflective thinking in countering conspiracy theories.

Zur Beschreibung der politischen Orientierung von Personen oder Parteien sind die Begriffe links und rechts allgegenwärtig. Auch in sozialwissenschaftlichen Befragungen werden die Begriffe links und rechts genutzt, um zu erfassen, wo Menschen sich selbst und wo sie Parteien im politischen Spektrum verorten. Basierend auf Daten aus den letzten zwölf Jahren der German Longitudinal Election Study (GLES) wird gezeigt, wie die politischen Parteien in Deutschland hinsichtlich ihrer Links-Rechts-Positionierung wahrgenommen werden, wie sich deren ideologische Verortungen im Laufe der Jahre gewandelt haben, wo Wähler:innen dieser Parteien sich selbst verorten und wie diese Verortungen mit wahrgenommenen themenspezifischen Positionierungen zusammenhängen.

Das hier vorliegende Dokument beschreibt die strategische Ausrichtung der German Longitudinal Election Study (GLES) zur Förderung von Open Science (Offene Wissenschaft). Hierbei wird anhand von vier Grundpfeilern des Konzepts von Open Science - Open Methodology, Open Data, Open Source und Open Access - dargestellt, in welchen Bereichen die GLES derzeit gut abschneidet, in
welchen Bereichen noch Verbesserungspotentiale vorhanden sind und welche Maßnahmen eingeleitet werden sollen, um die GLES nach Open Science Grundsätzen auszurichten. Die Umsetzung dieser Maßnahmen ist als langfristiger Prozess gedacht, bei dem existierende und neue Arbeitsprozesse sich am Ideal einer offenen Wissenschaftspraxis orientieren sollen. Ziel der hier vorgestellten Strategie soll es sein, sowohl Prozesse der Datenerhebung und Datenaufbereitung offen und transparent zu gestalten, als auch Forschende aktiv beim Praktizieren einer offenen Wissenschaft zu unterstützen. Das Dokument wurde von den Autor*innen in enger Rücksprache mit dem gesamten GLES Team bei GESIS und der Koordinierungsgruppe (KG) der GLES verfasst.

The GLES Open Science Challenge 2021 was a pioneering initiative in quantitative political science. Aimed at increasing the adoption of replicable and transparent research practices, it led to this special issue. The project combined the rigor of registered reports - a new publication format in which studies are evaluated prior to data collection/access and analysis - with quantitative political science research in the context of the 2021 German federal election. This special issue, which features the registered reports that resulted from the project, shows that transparent research following open science principles benefits our discipline and substantially contributes to quantitative political science. In this introduction to the special issue, we first elaborate on why more transparent research practices are necessary to guarantee the cumulative progress of scientific knowledge. We then show how registered reports can contribute to increasing the transparency of scientific practices. Next, we discuss the application of open science practices in quantitative political science to date. And finally, we present the process and schedule of the GLES Open Science Challenge and give an overview of the contributions included in this special issue.

AbstractThe GLES Open Science Challenge 2021 was a pilot project aimed at demonstrating that registered reports are an appropriate and beneficial publication format in quantitative political science that helps to increase transparency and replicability in the research process and thus yields substantial and relevant contributions to our discipline. The project resulted in the publication of this special issue, which includes seven registered reports based on data from the German Longitudinal Election Study (GLES) collected in the context of the 2021 German federal election. This concluding article of the special issue brings together the perspectives of the participating authors, reviewers, organizers, and editors in order to take stock of the different experiences gained and lessons learned in the course of the project. We are confident that future projects of a similar nature in political science, as well as authors, reviewers, and editors of registered reports, will benefit from these reflections.

The GLES Open Science Challenge 2021 was a pilot project aimed at demonstrating that registered reports are an appropriate and beneficial publication format in quantitative political science that helps to increase transparency and replicability in the research process and thus yields substantial and relevant contributions to our discipline. The project resulted in the publication of this special issue, which includes seven registered reports based on data from the German Longitudinal Election Study (GLES) collected in the context of the 2021 German federal election. This concluding article of the special issue brings together the perspectives of the participating authors, reviewers, organizers, and editors in order to take stock of the different experiences gained and lessons learned in the course of the project. We are confident that future projects of a similar nature in political science, as well as authors, reviewers, and editors of registered reports, will benefit from these reflections.

The GLES Open Science Challenge 2021 was a pilot project aimed at demonstrating that registered reports are an appropriate and beneficial publication format in quantitative political science that helps to increase transparency and replicability in the research process and thus yields substantial and relevant contributions to our discipline. The project resulted in the publication of this special issue, which includes seven registered reports based on data from the German Longitudinal Election Study (GLES) collected in the context of the 2021 German federal election. This concluding article of the special issue brings together the perspectives of the participating authors, reviewers, organizers, and editors in order to take stock of the different experiences gained and lessons learned in the course of the project. We are confident that future projects of a similar nature in political science, as well as authors, reviewers, and editors of registered reports, will benefit from these reflections.