Skip to main content
eScholarship
Open Access Publications from the University of California

Scholarly Works (20 results)

  • Article
  • Peer Reviewed
UC Davis Previously Published Works (2020)
Since the beginning of the new millennium, the partisan leanings and presidential voting of state white electorates have been changing. Drawing on party realignment theories and analyses of cultural politics, this paper hypothesizes that cultural issues may be the dimension along which the realignment is occurring. The empirical findings are consistent with this view. The cultural issue preferences of state white electorates are strongly related to change in partisanship from 2000 to 2016. Further, only cultural issue attitudes have become a stronger predictor of state white presidential voting over this period. The apparent effects of partisanship, economic issue attitudes, and racial attitudes have either declined over time or been substantial in some elections and less so in others.
    Cover page: The Cultural Realignment of State White Electorates in the 21st Century
    • Article
    • Peer Reviewed
    UC Davis Previously Published Works (2010)
    This paper analyzes the influence of the two most commonly examined causes of presidential vote choice, policy preferences and party identification. The focus is on change across elections in order to assess how the effects of issues and partisanship respond to the larger political context in which voters make their decisions. In contrast to party centric views of politics, I find little direct responsiveness to party issue contrast and substantial influence of candidate issue contrast. Further, I find that leading hypotheses for the “resurgence in partisanship” are not consistent with some important facts suggesting that the explanation remains elusive.
      Cover page: The Contextual Causes of Issue and Party Voting in American Presidential Elections
      • Article
      • Peer Reviewed
      UC Davis Previously Published Works (2019)
      This paper analyzes the positions Members of Congress take on important aspects of public policy, voters’ preferences on those issues, and individual-level voting behavior in congressional elections. Minimal evidence of issue accountability is found, and its form is different from that reported in previous research. The central implication is that representatives appear to have a good deal of discretion to take positions—at least with respect to voters—without paying an electoral penalty. The “electoral blind spot” (Bawn et al. Perspect Polit 10(3):571–597, 2012) in congressional elections may be substantial.
        Cover page: Issue Accountability in U.S. House Elections
        • Article
        • Peer Reviewed
        UC Davis Previously Published Works (2021)
        This article investigates how a key stratum of the partisan elite—party activists—have been positioned across time and policy issues. We examine the extent to which activists have polarized symmetrically or asymmetrically and find that only on the issue of abortion has one party’s activists (Republicans) polarized notably more than the other’s. The article also analyzes party activist proximity to the mass public’s policy preferences and finds that Democrats are consistently closer to the public on economic issues, and Republicans are consistently closer on a subset of non-economic issues. Our findings suggest the need for more nuanced theories of party activism and polarization along with providing a useful lens through which to view party electoral competition.
          Cover page: The Policy Polarization of Party Activists in the United States
          • Article
          Working Papers (1999)
            Cover page: The Political Implications of Higher Turnout
            • Article
            • Peer Reviewed
            UC Davis Previously Published Works (2021)
            We propose a modified spatial-voting rule to explain why congressional candidates adopt more extreme ideological positions than their constituents' preferences. Our model accepts the standard spatial-voting model with one critical exception: voters in the same party as a candidate tolerate extremism without imposing an electoral penalty. This, in turn, creates “leeway” for candidates to adopt extreme positions as they increasingly depend on voters from their own party. Electoral simulations demonstrate that a key election-level implication of this model is that it explains candidate polarization without relying on institutional factors like primary elections. Finally, we show that asymmetry in perceptual bias is one possible mechanism and that real-world patterns of ideological representation are consistent with our simulation results.
              Cover page: Reconciling Candidate Extremism and Spatial Voting
              • Article
              • Peer Reviewed
              UC Davis Previously Published Works (2016)
              This article analyzes the relationship between U.S. senators and their constituencies over the entire period of time that senators have been selected by direct election. Focusing on preference change within states, we identify three mechanisms that might produce responsiveness in senators’ ideological locations. We find that it is not merely the case that responsiveness is produced by party representation. Replacement of one senator with another of the same party facilitates responsiveness, too. And, even without electoral replacement, individual senators appear to adjust their ideological locations in response to changes in their electorates’ preferences. We also investigate how the mechanisms of responsiveness changed with the erosion of Democratic dominance in the South and as the parties grew stronger over time.
                Cover page: Assessing the Mechanisms of Senatorial Responsiveness to Constituency Preferences
                • Article
                • Peer Reviewed
                UC Davis Previously Published Works (2013)
                  Cover page: How Does Multilevel Regression and Poststratification Perform with Conventional National Surveys?
                  • Article
                  Working Papers (1995)
                    Cover page: Anticipating the effects of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993
                    • Thesis
                    • Peer Reviewed
                    UC Davis Electronic Theses and Dissertations (2022)

                    Are people biased in their exposure to, and processing of, political information? Do people only expose themselves to information that agrees with, and reinforces, their political dispositions; and do they process information to be consistent with their prior beliefs and opinions? This dissertation provides two studies that aim to answer these questions. The first study uses a seven-year panel survey to understand whether Americans’ news consumption is a function of their partisanship and ideology, as well as whether exposure to a particular ideology of news sources shapes one’s political identity. The second study uses an original survey experiment to assess: 1) individuals’ tendencies to follow misinformation from copartisan elites about climate change; and 2) tendencies to reject corrections from science experts that rebut this misinformation. I find little evidence that individuals are biased in how they seek and respond to information. One’s political identity does not inform the degree to which one is exposed to liberal or conservative news sources. Neither do individuals adhere to misinformation from copartisan elites when it is identified as such by scientists. Instead, I find that individuals seek out and respond to information in a largely unbiased manner: a boon for democracy and a well-informed public.

                      Cover page: Information Exposure and Opinion Fortnation
                      Top