Does Partisanship Affect Compliance With Government Recommendations?

Krupenkin, Masha

doi:10.2139/ssrn.3290237

Cited by 17 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We also observe important differences in high-stakes behaviors by partisanship that are consistent with sincere (and often unsupported) differences in factual belief. First, Krupenkin (2020) finds that co-partisans of the president express more trust in vaccine safety and greater intention to vaccinate themselves and their children than opposition partisans. These patterns, which were observed during both the administrations of George W. Bush and Barack Obama, are associated with changes in real-world behavior (though medical privacy laws and ecological inference concerns limit what can be demonstrated directly).…”

Section: Measuring Misperception Beliefs and Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Facts and Myths about Misperceptions

Nyhan

2020

Journal of Economic Perspectives

133

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Misperceptions threaten to warp mass opinion and public policy on controversial issues in politics, science, and health. What explains the prevalence and persistence of these false and unsupported beliefs, which seem to be genuinely held by many people? Though limits on cognitive resources and attention play an important role, many of the most destructive misperceptions arise in domains where individuals have weak incentives to hold accurate beliefs and strong directional motivations to endorse beliefs that are consistent with a group identity such as partisanship. These tendencies are often exploited by elites who frequently create and amplify misperceptions to influence elections and public policy. Though evidence is lacking for claims of a “post-truth” era, changes in the speed with which false information travels and the extent to which it can find receptive audiences require new approaches to counter misinformation. Reducing the propagation and influence of false claims will require further efforts to inoculate people in advance of exposure (for example, media literacy), debunk false claims that are already salient or widespread (for example, fact-checking), reduce the prevalence of low-quality information (for example, changing social media algorithms), and discourage elites from promoting false information (for example, strengthening reputational sanctions).

show abstract

Section: Measuring Misperception Beliefs and Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Facts and Myths about Misperceptions

Nyhan

2020

Journal of Economic Perspectives

133

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Political polarization has divided Americans along party lines (Iyengar et al, 2012 ) and eroded trust in well-cemented systems like higher education, which has led to policy decisions such as reducing appropriations to public institutions (Dar & Lee, 2014 ; Taylor et al, 2020 ). Often, political polarization has less to do with an attachment to an ideology or policy preference and more to do with social identity (Grossman & Hopkins, 2016 ) that encourages individuals to curate closed social networks, attack “out-group” members (Chen & Rohla, 2018 ; Iyengar et al, 2012 , 2019 ), and trust the power structures associated with “in-group” leaders (Krupenkin, 2020 ). Although both parties have experienced polarization, the cultivation of partisan identity has seemingly been stronger for the Republican Party (Hare & Poole, 2014 ), which has likely been strengthened by cultural homogenization of white people within the Republican Party (Zingher, 2018 ) and by unified support of President Trump (Doherty et al, 2017 ; Jones, 2020 ).…”

Section: Review Of the Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

We Want You Back: Uncovering the Effects on In-Person Instructional Operations in Fall 2020

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…1 Stanford University, CA, USA 2 Microsoft Research, NY, USA Sadin, & Trachtman, 2017), and individuals identifying as members of the party not in the presidency were both less likely to report vaccinating their children and to actually vaccinate them (Krupenkin, 2018).…”

Section: Research-article20192019mentioning

confidence: 99%

President Trump Stress Disorder: Partisanship, Ethnicity, and Expressive Reporting of Mental Distress After the 2016 Election

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the aftermath of the 2016 election, many Democrats reported significant increases in stress, depression, and anxiety. Were these increases real, or the product of expressive reporting? Using a unique data set of searches by more than 1 million Bing users before and after the election, we examine the changes in mental-health-related searches among Democrats and Republicans. We then compare these changes to shifts in searches among Spanish-speaking Latinos in the United States. We find that while Democrats may report greater increases in post-election mental distress, their mental health search behavior did not change after the election. On the other hand, Spanish-speaking Latinos had clear, significant, and sustained increases in searches for "depression," "anxiety," "therapy," and antidepressant medications. This suggests that for many Democrats, expressing mental distress after the election was a form of partisan cheerleading.

show abstract

Does Partisanship Affect Compliance With Government Recommendations?

Cited by 17 publications

References 47 publications

Facts and Myths about Misperceptions

Facts and Myths about Misperceptions

We Want You Back: Uncovering the Effects on In-Person Instructional Operations in Fall 2020

President Trump Stress Disorder: Partisanship, Ethnicity, and Expressive Reporting of Mental Distress After the 2016 Election

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About