Numerous studies indicate that political institutions play an important role in explaining variation in voter turnout across countries. The nuances of institutions unique to presidential elections have been largely overlooked, however, despite the different incentives they offer for voters to participate in elections. This article examines the effect that four presidential institutions had on voter turnout in presidential elections between 1974 and 2004—the timing of elections (whether concurrent or nonconcurrent), the power of the presidency, presidential electoral rules (plurality or majority runoff), and reelection rules. To isolate the effect of presidential institutions, this study controls for other likely influences on turnout, including the economic environment and the wider political context. It finds that (a) runoff elections dampen turnout whereas incumbency spurs it and (b) more powerful presidencies and elections, when held concurrently with legislative elections, have little effect on voter participation.
An extensive and growing body of research has demonstrated that knowing someone who is gay, lesbian, or bisexual can substantially increase support for policies, such as same‐sex marriage, that are designed to promote equal rights for gays. However, cognitive psychological theories and contemporary theories of public opinion also suggest that the effect of interpersonal contact could be highly contextual, facing limitations based on the context and prior beliefs or stereotypes of the contact situation. This article explores the limitations implied by these theories and tests for heterogeneity in the contact effect according to the individual's predispositions. We find considerable variability in the contact effect based on ideology, religion, culture, and other important political groups, such as white southern evangelicals. We conclude by considering the practical and policy implications of these limitations in the ability of interpersonal contact to generate support for same‐sex marriage and other gay rights policies. Un extenso y creciente cuerpo de investigación ha demostrado que conocer a alguien gay, lesbiana, o bisexual puede aumentar sustancialmente el apoyo a políticas tales como la del matrimonio entre parejas del mismo sexo que están diseñadas para promover la igualdad de derechos de los gays. Sin embargo, teorías cognitivas psicológicas y teorías contemporáneas de opinión pública también sugieren que el efecto del contacto interpersonal puede ser altamente contextual, lo que enfrenta limitaciones basadas en el contexto y creencias previas o los estereotipos de la situación en la que se da el contacto. Este artículo explora las limitantes sugeridas por estas teorías y examina la heterogeneidad en el efecto del contacto basado en ideología, religión, cultura, y otros grupos políticos importantes tales como los evangélicos blancos sureños. Concluimos considerando las implicaciones prácticas y para la hechura de políticas de estas limitaciones del contacto interpersonal para generar apoyo para el matrimonio entre parejas del mismo sexo y otras políticas de derechos de los gays.
This research tests the idea that retrospective voting in presidential elections is conditional, that retrospective evaluations are applied more strictly to incumbents seeking election than to in-party candidates (successor candidates) who are not incumbents. Voters may assign only partial credit or blame for national conditions to successor candidates because, unlike incumbents, these candidates did not personally have power over the policies that might have affected the national conditions leading up to the election. This theory of conditional retrospective voting is examined at both the aggregate level on elections since 1948 and with individual-level survey data since 1972. The analysis consistently finds, as the theory of conditional retrospective voting contends, that the electorate's retrospective evaluations matter significantly more to the vote for an incumbent than to the vote for a successor candidate of the in-party.
We assess governmental and non-governmental responses to disasters using primary data of Hurricane Katrina survivors along the Mississippi Gulf Coast. Non-governmental sources include nonprofit relief groups, faith-based organizations, and survivors' self-identified social networks. We assess the impact of these governmental and non-governmental relief efforts on survivors' economic, psychological, physical, and social effects from the disaster. Our results show that social isolation significantly increases perceptions of disaster disturbance and decreases perceived rates of disaster relief. Additionally, survivors perceive that social networks provide greater sources of psychological, financial and social disaster relief than government sources. However, survivors' social networks decay sharply in the immediate aftermath of a disaster, and they do not appear to fully recover a year from the disaster. These social networks themselves are not fully resilient to a disaster.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.