Interfaith Advocacy

Knutson, Katherine E.

doi:10.4324/9780203505540

Cited by 5 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[6], [7] gj3470b 61 1 1153. 9 4.4 [8] hat-p-12b 23 1 2158.0 4.1 [9] hat-p-20b 15 1 1704.3 11.2 [9] hat-p-23b 27 2 796. 5 27.3 [10], [11] hat Results for the Gaussian process hyperparameters, radial velocity offsets, and instrumental jitters for each of the 46 systems.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The expression (9) shows the importance of the determination of the parameter c = e 1 cos ω 1 for the determination of α. The sensibility to this method depends either on the precision of the radial velocity to determine the 2n harmonics in the RV data or on the measurement of the time of secondary eclipse to directly constrain the quantity c = e 1 cos ω 1 .…”

Section: Radial Velocity Signal From Co-orbital Planetsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The TROY project: Searching for co-orbital bodies to known planets

Lillo-Box

Barrado

Figueira

et al. 2018

A&A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context. The detection of Earth-like planets, exocomets or Kuiper belts show that the different components found in the solar system should also be present in other planetary systems. Trojans are one of these components and can be considered fossils of the first stages in the life of planetary systems. Their detection in extrasolar systems would open a new scientific window to investigate formation and migration processes. Aims. In this context, the main goal of the TROY project is to detect exotrojans for the first time and to measure their occurrence rate (η-Trojan). In this first paper, we describe the goals and methodology of the project. Additionally, we used archival radial velocity data of 46 planetary systems to place upper limits on the mass of possible trojans and investigate the presence of co-orbital planets down to several tens of Earth masses. Methods. We used archival radial velocity data of 46 close-in (P < 5 days) transiting planets (without detected companions) with information from high-precision radial velocity instruments. We took advantage of the time of mid-transit and secondary eclipses (when available) to constrain the possible presence of additional objects co-orbiting the star along with the planet. This, together with a good phase coverage, breaks the degeneracy between a trojan planet signature and signals coming from additional planets or underestimated eccentricity. Results. We identify nine systems for which the archival data provide >1σ evidence for a mass imbalance between L4 and L5. Two of these systems provide >2σ detection, but no significant detection is found among our sample. We also report upper limits to the masses at L4/L5 in all studied systems and discuss the results in the context of previous findings.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Radial Velocity Signal From Co-orbital Planetsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The TROY project: Searching for co-orbital bodies to known planets

Lillo-Box

Barrado

Figueira

et al. 2018

A&A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Before turning to our data, it is important to address the argument that religious interest groups may be less inclined toward flexibility because they are constrained by their own theologically rigid or moral framework (Hofrenning 1995; Rohlinger 2002; Knutson 2013). The internal diversity of religious groups can constrain organizational leaders as they construct communication.…”

Section: Religious Interest Groups and Flexible Messagingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, as the denominational lobbies continue to shrink along with their denominations, coalition advocacy has become much more common and religious lobbies have joined secular groups to form issue advocacy coalitions, such as Interfaith Power and Light and others. This opens up coalitions to the intricacies of pleasing members from different faith traditions that can make generating statements “difficult, time consuming, and slow” (Knutson 2013, 121). Nevertheless, the history of the Christian Right demonstrates a willingness to compromise in order to work with similarly motivated religious groups and to navigate changing political currents (Moen 1994; Wilcox 1994; Shields 2009; Williams 2012).…”

Section: Religious Interest Groups and Flexible Messagingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Communicating in Good Faith? Dynamics of the Christian Right Agenda

Wilson

Djupe

2020

Politics and Religion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is an article of faith that organized interests represent members to elected officials making use of synchronized communication channels. Rarely, if at all, have researchers had access to multiple, internal, and external channels to test this notion. We mine a trove of nearly 2,500 emails the Family Research Council (FRC) sent to list subscribers from 2007 to 2018. Text tools allow us to depict message flexibility of the FRC. We then consider how internal and external messages may be linked by examining the issue content of emails in relation to press releases. Finally, we note the bills lobbied by FRC and the frequency these are mentioned in the internal email messages. Our findings are twofold. First, they support the conditional independence of communication channels in ways that appear to conform to the requisites of the different audiences: elected officials are likely mobilized by different signals than members are. Second, our evidence shows that the flexibility organized interests have in composing their communications can mean that different audiences are presented with considerably different political agendas. While FRC has significant sophisticated message flexibility, our data set indicates that such flexibility can raise serious concerns about good faith representation.

show abstract

“…Like other organized interests, the range of strategies employed in this endeavor includes the lobbying of elected officials, utilizing links to political figures and institutions, participation in protests, promoting campaigns, mobilizing their memberships, and engaging in numerous forms of political debate. The use of discourse is central to these activities, providing one of the key means by which religious actors attempt to persuade wider publics as to the merits of a specific position, as well as to challenge and delegitimize points of view that differ from their own (see Hofrenning 1995; Knutson 2013).…”

Section: The Discourse Of Religious Actorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do Religious Justifications Distort Policy Debates? Some Empirics on the Case for Public Reason

Kettell

Djupe

2020

Politics and Religion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scholars engaged in debates about the use of public reason often view religious arguments as being out of bounds. Yet the real-world impact of religious discourse remains underexplored. This study contributes to research in this area with an empirical test looking at the impact of religious arguments on a particular policy debate. A survey experiment explored the effects of religious and secular cues with varied policy directions on the issue of assisted dying. The findings showed that secular arguments were considerably more likely to elicit a positive response, and that, while religious arguments were not a conversation stopper, they produced significant distortions in political perceptions among participants, though not necessarily along the identity lines critical to the public reason debate. KeywordsPublic reason; religious cues; experiment; assisted dying 1 We would like to thank the two anonymous reviewers for their thoughtful comments and suggestions on an earlier version of this paper. We would also like to thank Angelia Wilson, who brought us together at a conference at the University of Manchester.

show abstract

Interfaith Advocacy

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

The TROY project: Searching for co-orbital bodies to known planets

The TROY project: Searching for co-orbital bodies to known planets

Communicating in Good Faith? Dynamics of the Christian Right Agenda

Do Religious Justifications Distort Policy Debates? Some Empirics on the Case for Public Reason

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About