In the Eye of the Beholder? Motivated Reasoning in Disputed Elections

This study uses an experimental design to simulate the ballot counting process during a hand-recount after a disputed election. Applying psychological theories of motivated reasoning to the political process, we find that ballot counters’ party identification conditionally influences their ballot counting decisions. Party identification’s effect on motivated reasoning is greater when ballot counters are given ambiguous, versus specific, instructions for determining voter intent. This study’s findings have major implications for ballot counting procedures throughout the United States and for the use of motivated reasoning in the political science literature.     

When Money Cannot Encourage Participation: Campaign Spending and Rolloff in Low Visibility Judicial Elections

Debates about the role of money in politics are commonplace. Although some critics point to the potentially negative impact spending has in elections, most recent scholarly evidence indicates that spending may actually promote greater participation in the political process. However, most of this research has uncovered this relationship in races for more visible offices; few studies have focused on whether the same linkage is present in low-information elections. For a variety of reasons, it is not altogether certain whether this relationship would exist for such offices. To test this proposition, we examine the impact of campaign spending on voter rolloff in 172 contested races for intermediate appellate courts (IAC) between 2000 and 2008. In contrast to other types of elections, combined candidate spending in these races had no effect on ballot rolloff.     

An Empirical Test of the Relative Education Model in Sweden

Numerous studies show that education has a positive effect on political participation at the individual level. However, the increase in aggregate levels of education in most Western countries over the last decades has not resulted in a corresponding increase in aggregate levels of political participation. Nie et al. (Education and democratic citizenship in America, 1996) propose the relative education model as a possible solution to this paradox. According to this model, it is not the skills promoted by education that have positive effects on political participation. Rather, education influences individuals’ social status, which in turn influences political participation. The relative education model expects that the individual-level effect of an additional year of education will decrease as the mean level of education in the environment increases. This article evaluates this theory using Swedish election surveys (1985–2006) and it thus provides the first in depth evaluation of the relative education model outside the US. On voting and political participation related to political parties, support is found for the relative education model.     

The Political Ecology of Opinion in Big-Donor Neighborhoods

Major campaign donors are highly concentrated geographically. A relative handful of neighborhoods accounts for the bulk of all money contributed to political campaigns. Public opinion in these elite neighborhoods is very different from that in the country as a whole and in low-donor areas. On a number of prominent political issues, the prevailing viewpoint in high-donor neighborhoods can be characterized as cosmopolitan and libertarian, rather than populist or moralistic. Merging Federal Election Commission contribution data with three recent large-scale national surveys, we find that these opinion differences are not solely the result of big-donor areas’ high concentration of wealthy and educated individuals. Instead, these neighborhoods have a distinctive political ecology that likely reinforces and intensifies biases in opinion. Given that these locales are the origin for the lion’s share of campaign donations, they may steer the national political agenda in unrepresentative directions.     

The Origins &; Meaning of Liberal/Conservative Self-Identifications Revisited

This paper examines the permanence of differences in the psychological underpinnings of ideological self-identifications. Previous research has suggested that conservatives differ from liberals insofar as their self-identifications as such are best explained as the product of a negative reaction (both to liberalism generally and to the groups associated with it in particular) rather than a positive embrace. However, this paper demonstrates that the dynamics underlying the formation of ideological self-identifications are not static reflections of inherent differences in liberal and conservative psychologies but rather evolve in response to changes in the political environment. Whereas feelings (positive or negative) toward liberalism played a decisive role in shaping individuals’ ideological self-identifications during the New Deal/Great Society era of liberal and Democratic political hegemony, the subsequent resurgence of political conservatism produced a decisive shift in the bases of liberal and conservative self-identifications. In particular, just as conservative self-identifications once primarily represented a reaction against liberalism and its associated symbols, hostility toward conservatism and its associated symbols has in recent years become an increasingly important source of liberal self-identifications.     

The Invisible Hand and the Wisdom of the Hive

Self-interest is required for survival and reproduction and lies at the foundation of economic theory. But the presence of social groups with functional internal structure is incompatible with unmitigated self-interest. This essay compares the control of self-interest in humans and honey bees, showing the reasons for different evolutionary outcomes. The less effective checks of self-interest in humans lead to familiar forms of social discord, and in our capitalistic democracy, negative economic and ecological consequences of growing scope. Change will require moderating some firmly held political beliefs.