Suchergebnisse

AbstractConjoint experiments are quickly gaining popularity as a vehicle for studying multidimensional political preferences. A common way to explore heterogeneity of preferences estimated with conjoint experiments is by estimating average marginal component effects across subgroups. However, this method does not give the researcher the full access to the variation of preferences in the studied populations, as that would require estimating effects on the individual level. Currently, there is no accepted technique to obtain estimates of individual-level preferences from conjoint experiments. The present paper addresses this gap by proposing a procedure to estimate individual preferences as respondent-specific marginal component effects. The proposed strategy does not require any additional assumptions compared to the standard conjoint analysis, although some changes to the task design are recommended. Methods to account for uncertainty in resulting estimates are also discussed. Using the proposed procedure, I partially replicate a conjoint experiment on immigrant admission with recommended design adjustments. Then, I demonstrate how individual marginal component effects can be used to explore distributions of preferences, intercorrelations between different preference dimensions, and relationships of preferences to other variables of interest.

ObjectivesThere is important variation in beliefs about immigration within the publics of immigrant‐receiving societies but empirical social research has largely overlooked it. The "imagined immigration" concept aims to bring these beliefs back in as an important component of public attitudes toward immigrants. It also offers a new perspective on the political conflict around immigration that persists despite the consensus on desired qualities of potential immigrants among citizens in industrial democracies.MethodsI review the imagined immigration concept and present new empirical evidence in its favor using original survey studies in the United States and Britain.ResultsI describe respondents' beliefs about immigrants, demonstrate their association with partisanship, and confirm that these beliefs are significantly related to perceptions of immigration as harmful—even when controlled for partisanship, ideology, and ethnocentrism.ConclusionI corroborate the foundations of the imagined immigration concept and discuss its promise and limitations.

In the present study I use large-scale survey data to compare radical right voting to other forms of electoral behavior in Western Europe. The chosen method, multilevel multinomial logistic regression, allows, first, distinguishing among voting for several party families as well as abstention and, second, controlling for differences between countries and survey rounds. I find that the radical right electorate is not characterized by social alienation or anti-modern values; these characteristics are more likely to be encountered among people who abstain from elections. Radical right voting is most strongly motivated by political attitudes, namely by negative perception of immigration, political mistrust, opposition to income redistribution, and -- rather unexpectedly -- political satisfaction. My analysis also shows that radical right parties in different West European countries attract voters with similar ideological orientations which remain relatively stable over time. In the conclusion I discuss the implications of my findings for comparative research on the radical right party family. [Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications Ltd., copyright holder.]

In the present study I use large-scale survey data to compare radical right voting to other forms of electoral behavior in Western Europe. The chosen method, multilevel multinomial logistic regression, allows, first, distinguishing among voting for several party families as well as abstention and, second, controlling for differences between countries and survey rounds. I find that the radical right electorate is not characterized by social alienation or anti-modern values; these characteristics are more likely to be encountered among people who abstain from elections. Radical right voting is most strongly motivated by political attitudes, namely by negative perception of immigration, political mistrust, opposition to income redistribution, and – rather unexpectedly – political satisfaction. My analysis also shows that radical right parties in different West European countries attract voters with similar ideological orientations which remain relatively stable over time. In the conclusion I discuss the implications of my findings for comparative research on the radical right party family.

A growing number of studies test key cultural constructs used in comparative political research for invariance across countries, only to declare these constructs incomparable if the invariance tests fail. The assumption underlying this kind of conclusion is that between-country differences in within-country factor solutions reflect cross-cultural inequivalence of the respective survey items. Using a Bayesian approach, we explore variation in measurement quality across countries focusing on sexual emancipation. We find that between-country differences in factor solutions reflect little more than imbalances in within-country dispersions of the construct items. As we demonstrate, discrete and bounded response scales used in standard surveys enforce a mathematical relationship between extreme country means, low within-country dispersions, and weak factor solutions. We formalize this insight by introducing a between–within model of cultural variation. Our contribution calls into question the practice of declaring constructs to be incomparable based on failed invariance tests.

The debate on immigration policy and enforcement in the United States often revolves around the phenomenon of sanctuary cities. While past research accounts for Americans' attitudes toward sanctuary cities and the effects of sanctuary policies on immigrant and Latino communities, less is known about how potential migrants factor sanctuary status into moving choices. We implement a conjoint survey experiment in Mexico, in which we ask respondents to rate the attractiveness of hypothetical localities in the United States described in terms of several attributes, including immigration enforcement policies. Results show that sanctuary status increases the attractiveness of potential immigration destinations in the United States. However, its effect is overshadowed by preferences for localities with many jobs and low crime rates, as well as ones that voted for Biden in 2020. Despite emphasis on sanctuary cities in U.S. political rhetoric, sanctuary policies only modestly increase the attractiveness of destinations for potential migrants.