When ethnic prejudice is political: an experiment in beliefs and hostility toward immigrant out-groups in Italy

2019 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 213-234
Author(s):  
Mauro Barisione

AbstractWhen the immigration issue has been strongly politicized, prejudice toward minority out-groups can be profoundly imbued with politics, to the point that citizen responses to partisan cues about immigrants tend to operate on the basis of a ‘political sympathy/antipathy bias’. This article demonstrates that there is a direct causal relation between the nature (i.e. contents and sources) of political communication over immigrants and voters' responses. Drawing on an experimental design based on ITANES (Italian National Election Studies) 2018 election survey data, it isolates the effect that the voters' ideology and party alignments, as well as the partisan source of a message, exert on manifestations of ethnic prejudice, operationalized as the refusal to accept a plausibile and counter-stereotypical statement about immigrants. It concludes that even a mere symbolic change in communication by those party actors (i.e. the League) which ‘own’ the issue would suffice to attenuate hostility toward out-groups, to the extent that it results from sustained partisan rhetoric and mobilization.

Author(s):  
Pradeep K. Chhibber ◽  
Rahul Verma

A common view is that in Indian elections parties, politicians, and voters are engaged in a quid-pro-quo in which citizens vote for a politician who offers them individual benefits. We find no evidence that voters exchange votes for benefits. In fact, ideology is a better predictor of the vote than the receipt of private or club goods. The use of cash is indeed widespread in India during election time but money is needed to build the campaign, to mobilize votes and for candidates, and to establish candidates’ credibility as leaders of import. We show this using the survey data from national election studies, a case study, and the results of a small experiment in Tamil Nadu.


2019 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 590-598 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jens Olav Dahlgaard ◽  
Jonas Hedegaard Hansen ◽  
Kasper M. Hansen ◽  
Yosef Bhatti

Most nonexperimental studies of voter turnout rely on survey data. However, surveys overestimate turnout because of (1) nonresponse bias and (2) overreporting. We investigate this possibility using a rich dataset of Danish voters, which includes validated turnout indicators from administrative data for both respondents and nonrespondents, as well as respondents’ self-reported voting from the Danish National Election Studies. We show that both nonresponse bias and overreporting contribute significantly to overestimations of turnout. Further, we use covariates from the administrative data available for both respondents and nonrespondents to demonstrate that both factors also significantly bias the predictors of turnout. In our case, we find that nonresponse bias and overreporting masks a gender gap of two and a half percentage points in women’s favor as well as a gap of 25 percentage points in ethnic Danes’ favor compared with Danes of immigrant heritage.


1990 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 141-147 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nelson Wiseman

Asian Survey ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 423-439
Author(s):  
Reetika Syal

Abstract This article finds, through statistical analysis of the National Election Studies (2004) data, that an increase in intergenerational education levels can positively influence an individual's political interest and political participation. Participatory trends in India are influenced by demographic factors such as caste, class, gender, income, and locality. However, this study finds that education can have a liberating effect from these various socio-economic constraints. It can provide greater access to resources and information, thus helping to increase active political participation.


2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 651-668
Author(s):  
Christina Eder ◽  
Alexander Jedinger

Norteamérica ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Reynaldo Yunuen Ortega Ortiz ◽  
Ma. Edith Pacheco Muñoz

En este artículo nos preguntamos: ¿Cuál fue la capacidad explicativa de la desigualdad y la pobreza en el ámbito estatal en las elecciones presidenciales de Estados Unido en 2012 y 2016? ¿Cuál fue el balance estatal en las elecciones presidenciales en Estados Unidos? Y exploramos a nivel individual, utilizando la “American National Election Studies Survey”, ¿qué variables nos ayudan a entender el voto en favor de los candidatos presidenciales republicanos en 2012 y 2016? Así, para contestar nuestras preguntas realizamos dos análisis, uno, en el ámbito estatal, y otro, a partir de los votantes, con el fin de explicar los resultados contrastantes de 2012 y 2016.


1988 ◽  
Vol 52 (3) ◽  
pp. 289 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara A. Anderson ◽  
Brian D. Silver ◽  
Paul R. Abramson

1995 ◽  
Vol 28 (03) ◽  
pp. 533-534
Author(s):  
Erik W. Austin ◽  
Steven J. Rosenstone

1999 ◽  
Author(s):  
Virginia Sapiro ◽  
Steven J. Rosenstone ◽  
Donald R. Kinder ◽  
Warren E. Miller ◽  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document