philippmendoza.bsky.social
PhDing @UvA_ASCoR • #NegCampaign • #AffectivePolarization • #Populism • #CSS • baord @FANofAlpbach of @forumalpbach • #Capoeirista🤸 🟥
22 posts
1,288 followers
230 following
Regular Contributor
Conversation Starter
comment in response to
post
Congratulations 🎉
comment in response to
post
2) More anti-immigrant positions do not weaken the radical right
Our research shows that when established parties move to the right on immigration this does not weaken the radical right but if anything strengthens them. It contributes to their normalization and legitimation
doi.org/10.1017/psrm...
comment in response to
post
I would love to be added 🙏
comment in response to
post
@ascor.bsky.social
comment in response to
post
#takeaways (2/2):
➡️ harsh campaign effects vary across contexts and voters.
➡️ using third-party attackers or targeting harsh campaigns may reduce backlash.
➡️ classical PolSci models can help us understand the effects of contemporary campaigning tactics.
comment in response to
post
#takeaways (1/2):
➡️ having better alternatives shapes how voters assess and react to negative or uncivil campaigns.
➡️ harsh campaigns may mobilize core supporters, but risk alienating swing voters with viable alternatives.
comment in response to
post
5️⃣ This effect is especially emphasized among respondents that follow the election campaigns more closely.
comment in response to
post
However,
4️⃣ Voters lend less political support to parties leading harsher campaigns when they have an at least equally attractive alternative to choose from!
Parties lose any “negativity bonus” among voters that are ideologically at least equally close to their competition.
comment in response to
post
3️⃣ The campaigning party's ideological proximity to other competing parties also has little impact (no significant interaction).
comment in response to
post
2️⃣ These differences are not due to the differing number of parties available to voters across contexts (no sig. interaction).
Note: Previously negative baseline effects render positive after inclusion of covariates such as parties' euroskepticism.
comment in response to
post
1️⃣ Parties with harsher campaigns (expert-judged) receive lower political support (PTV) on average, but this relationship varies by context.
Note: Model contains fixed effect + random slopes without other covariates.
comment in response to
post
Do the effects of harsher campaigns on voters' political support depend on:
➡️ the number of competing parties in an election?
➡️ a party's ideological distance to the next closest competitor?
➡️ the presence of a viable alternative for a voter?
📊 Key findings 👇
comment in response to
post
To test this, we combine expert's campaign ratings with voter's political support for parties (propensity to vote, PTV) for 28 cntr & >270 parties surrounding the 2019 🇪🇺 European Parliament elections 🗳️.
comment in response to
post
💡Context shapes reactions to harsh campaigns!
Voters weigh policy preferences against disapproval of campaign styles. Viable alternatives ease this trade-off.
When voters have other options, they can step away from harsher campaigning parties without compromising values.
comment in response to
post
Recent elections in EU & US show politicians often attack opponents or break civility norms without major backlash at the polls—yet research 📚 suggests voters generally disapprove of harsher campaigns.
How can we explain the gap? 🤔
comment in response to
post
Die ist mittlerweile wsl. schon ein alter Hut nach neueren fivethirtyeight Visualisierungen und zumal die ein paar Jahre alt ist aber vielleicht dennoch eine nice Art um deinen Studis deine Forschung näher zu bringen.
datastori.es/134-visualiz... (2/2)
comment in response to
post
Gratuliere zum outreach eurer Studie 🎉!
Ich musste beim drüberfliegen grad an eine Folge vom datastori.es podcast zu uncertainty visualisation denken; (1/2)