Suchergebnisse

Do personal experiences matter for public attitudes towards the role of the government? In the domain of healthcare, I argue that policies change the salience of personal experiences for government attitudes. Specifically, I expect that personal experiences matter less for government attitudes when healthcare is publicly financed, that is, when there is less emphasis on financing healthcare via market-based choices. Empirically, I link subjective and objective personal experiences from the International Social Survey Programme to macro-level policy indicators. The analysis provides strong support for the expectation and contributes to a growing body of literature interested in the underpinnings of government attitudes in a comparative perspective.

AbstractIn order to explain differences in political interest, two strands of literature point to the relevance of either dispositional or situational factors. I remedy this and show how political interest is shaped by the interplay between personality differences and the political environment. Specifically, I demonstrate that people with a stable motivation for engaging with new ideas are more interested in politics when exposed to new political events, e.g. during election campaigns and when unexpected events unfold. The results have implications for our understanding of political inequalities in democratic engagement and shed light on how citizens' interest in politics can be relatively stable over time as well as responsive to the political environment in predictable ways.

There has been an impressive stride in the research on policy feedback effects on mass publics over recent years. However, we lack systematic evidence on how large such policy feedback effects are in the literature. This article provides a review of 65 published studies and quantifies the findings and key themes in the policy feedback literature. The results show a great degree of heterogeneity in the domains and outcomes being studied and in the effects of policies on the public. In line with the findings from narrative reviews, feedback effects are greater for outcomes related to political participation and engagement. Last, the review sheds light on important theoretical and methodological limitations to be addressed in future research.

A large body of literature has provided mixed results on the impact of welfare retrenchments on government support. This article examines whether the impact of welfare retrenchments can be explained by proximity, i.e. whether or not the retrenched policy is related to people's everyday lives. To overcome limitations in previous studies, the empirical approach utilizes a natural experiment with data from the European Social Survey collected concurrently with a salient retrenchment reform of the education grant system in Denmark. The results confirm that people proximate to a welfare policy react substantially stronger to retrenchment reforms than the general public. Robustness and placebo tests further show that the results are not caused by non-personal proximities or satisfaction levels not related to the reform and the government. In sum, the findings speak to a growing body of literature interested in the impact of government policies on mass public.

This book is about how opinion polls are reported in the media. Opinions polls are not reported in the media as unfiltered numbers, and some opinion polls are not reported at all. This volume demonstrates how opinion polls travel through several stages that eventually turn boring numbers into biased news in the media. The framework offered in this book helps to understand how some polls end up in the news coverage, and which systemic biases abound in the news media reports of opinion polls. In the end, a change narrative will be prominent in the reporting of opinion polls which contributes to what the general public sees and shares. The findings cover journalists, politicians, experts and the public, and how they all share a strong preference for change. Erik Gahner Larsen is Senior Scientific Adviser at the Conflict Analysis Research Centre, University of Kent, UK. Zoltán Fazekas is Associate Professor of Business and Politics, with focus on quantitative methods in the Department of International Economics, Government and Business at the Copenhagen Business School, Denmark. .

While the diversity of populism has received considerable attention, surprisingly little is known about populist parties that defy clear-cut left-right categorization. We show that valence populist parties are non-positional and substantially different from both left-wing and right-wing populist parties. First, we demonstrate that valence populist parties deliberately take blurry positions on both the economic and socio-cultural dimensions of competition. Second, we show that such an ambiguity is counterbalanced by a disproportionate emphasis on anti-corruption appeals, the most paradigmatic example of a non-positional dimension. Our results have important implications for our understanding of varieties of populism, in particular, and the positional and non-positional competition strategies of political parties, in general.

Ved hjemmearbejde vil man ofte opretholde arbejdsrelationer og sociale relationer, enten ved hjælp af e-mails, Zoom-møder eller lignende. Derimod vil man typisk ikke erstatte de interaktioner, som opfattes som unødvendig "støj" – altså de typiske kaffemaskinesnakke eller tilfældige frokostsamtaler. Vi argumenterer for, at dette kan få fatale konsekvenser på lang sigt, særligt for vidensmedarbejdere, idet tilsyneladende unødvendige snakke kan vise sig at bibringe ny, brugbar viden. Vi opbygger disse argumenter med udgangspunkt i nyere litteratur om organisationsdesign, som giver os et rammeværk til at belyse effekten af, at (dele af ) medarbejderstaben arbejder hjemmefra. Ligeledes præsenterer vi et simpelt designværktøj, som organisationer kan bruge til at vurdere deres eget behov for designtilpasninger i forbindelse med planlægning af eventuelle fremtidige hjemmearbejdspladser.

Although political polls show stability over short periods of time, most media coverage of polls highlights recurrent changes in the political competition. We present evidence for a snowball effect where small and insignificant changes in polls end up in the media coverage as stories about changes. To demonstrate this process, we rely on the full population of political polls in Denmark and a combination of human coding and supervised machine learning of more than four thousand news articles. Through these steps, we show how a horserace coverage of polls about change can rest on a foundation of stability.

This article discusses possible issues of how media content and exposure were linked in previous research. It argues that the original conclusions of the article 'Who's Afraid of Conflict? The Mobilizing Effect of Conflict Framing in Campaign News' do not hold due to the chosen operationalization. It also demonstrates that using the proposed methodology, both exposure to conflictual and non-conflictual news yield the same substantive conclusion. In addition to re-evaluating the role of conflict, the article contributes to the discussion on how to integrate media and individual-level measures in the study of electoral behavior.

AbstractNotes and Insights is a forum for discussion and debate about current issues in the philosophy and application of the system dynamics approach, and a marketplace for the exchange of information about current research, policy issues and teaching experiences. Manuscripts treating material particularly suited to presentation in short form (less than 2,000 words) should be sent to Erich Zahn, Betriebswirtschaftlic hes Institut, Abt. IV, Universität Stuttgart, Keplerstr. 17, D‐7000 Stuttgart 1, Germany or to Yaman Barlas, Dept. of Industrial Engineering, Bogazici University, 80815 Bebek, Istanbul, Turkey.