An Overview of the Rorschach Performance Assessment System (R-PAS)

We provide an overview of the Rorschach Performance Assessment System (R-PAS; Meyer, Viglione, Mihura, Erard, & Erdberg, 2011). After providing a general introduction to Rorschach-based assessment, the rationale and features of R-PAS are outlined. As part of this discussion, some of the ways in which R-PAS differs from the Comprehensive System (CS) (Exner, 2003) are delineated.     

A Bottom‐Up Theory of Public Opinion about Foreign Policy

If public opinion about foreign policy is such an elite‐driven process, why does the public often disagree with what elites have to say? We argue here that elite cue‐taking models in International Relations are both overly pessimistic and unnecessarily restrictive. Members of the public may lack information about the world around them, but they do not lack principles, and information need not only cascade from the top down. We present the results from five survey experiments where we show that cues from social peers are at least as strong as those from political elites. Our theory and results build on a growing number of findings that individuals are embedded in a social context that combines with their general orientations toward foreign policy in shaping responses toward the world around them. Thus, we suggest the public is perhaps better equipped for espousing judgments in foreign affairs than many of our top‐down models claim.     

Which Narrative Strategies Durably Reduce Prejudice? Evidence from Field and Survey Experiments Supporting the Efficacy of Perspective-Getting

Exclusionary attitudes towards outgroups contribute to social and political challenges worldwide. Previous field experiments found that interpersonal conversations employing multiple narrative strategies can durably reduce exclusionary attitudes. We theoretically distinguish between three of these narrative strategies: narratives which promote analogic perspective taking, vicarious perspective-giving, and perspective-getting. Previous research has assigned these strategies together in a compound treatment, leaving open important theoretical and practical questions about each's effectiveness. We present results from three field studies and a survey experiment that individually manipulate their presence. Across the field studies, we find omitting prompts to engage in analogic perspective-taking and vicarious perspective-giving does not diminish effects; conversations employing only perspective-getting narratives durably reduce exclusionary attitudes. Results from within-subject analyses and a survey experiment similarly show that perspective-getting consistently reduces exclusionary attitudes and activates multiple mechanisms. These results refine theoretical understandings of prejudice reduction and support facilitating perspective-getting in conversations intended to reduce exclusionary attitudes.     

Does the State Promote Communal Violence for Electoral Reasons?

It has often been alleged, most recently in the recommendations of India's National Advisory Council (NAC), that the Indian state promotes, or is complicit in, Hindu-Muslim violence for political or electoral reasons. But the evidence for the claim has historically been sketchy. In StevenWilkinson's work, Votes and Violence, the argument is that the evidence supporting state complicity is systematic.We examine this argument and find it to be fundamentally flawed.     

Registrants,Voters, and Turnout Variability Across Neighborhoods

Although political participation has received wide-ranging scholarly attention, little is known for certain about the effects of social and political context on turnout. A scattered set of analyses—well-known by both political scientists and campaign consultants—suggests that ones neighborhood has a relatively minor impact on the decision to vote. These analyses, however, typically rely upon data from a single location. Drawing on official lists of registered voters from sixteen major counties across seven states (including Florida) from the 2000 presidential election, we use geographic/mapping information and hierarchical models to obtain a more accurate picture of how neighborhood characteristics affect participation, especially among partisans. Our research shows that neighborhoods influence voting by interacting with partisan affiliation to dampen turnout among voters we might otherwise expect to participate. Most notably, we find Republican partisans in enemy territory tend to vote less than expected, even after accounting for socioeconomic status. Our findings have implications for campaign strategy, and lead us to suggest that campaign targeting efforts could be improved by an integration of aggregate- and individual-level information about voters.