Survey Design, Order Effects, and Causal Mediation Analysis

Chaudoin, Stephen; Gaines, Brian J.; Livny, Avital

doi:10.1086/715166

Cited by 18 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, by presenting the dependent variable before the mediating variable, we failed to establish that perceptions of legal system bias against the exonerees preceded reactions to the exonerees. Although this limitation does not invalidate our interpretation of the results (see Chaudoin et al, 2021), we wanted to ensure that our independent variable (the exoneree’s race) predicted the mediator and that the mediator predicted the outcome. Accordingly, we conducted Experiment 3, a partial replication of Experiment 2, in which we measured beliefs about legal system bias before we measured reactions to the exonerees.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The stigma of wrongful conviction differs for White and Black exonerees.

Faison¹,

Smalarz²,

Madon³

et al. 2023

Law and Human Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Black people are disproportionately targeted and disadvantaged in the criminal legal system. We tested whether Black exonerees are similarly disadvantaged by the stigma of wrongful conviction. Hypotheses: In Experiment 1, we predicted that the stigma of wrongful conviction would be greater for Black than White exonerees. After finding the opposite pattern, we conducted two experiments to investigate the psychological underpinnings of this counterintuitive effect-specifically, whether it was driven by attempts to appear unprejudiced and/or beliefs regarding the legal system bias that Black and White exonerees face. Method: In Experiment 1, we unobtrusively measured non-Black participants' behavioral reactions to an anticipated meeting with a Black or White exoneree or businessman. In Experiment 2, participants completed measures that assessed their motivation to appear unprejudiced and then, in a separate session, evaluated a Black or White exoneree and reported their beliefs about the legal system bias faced by the exoneree. Experiment 3 was a partial replication of Experiment 2. In Experiments 2 and 3, we examined data from both non-Black and Black participants. Results: Non-Black participants in Experiment 1 stigmatized the White exoneree, d = −0.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) [−0.72, 0.10], but not the Black exoneree, d = 0.44, 95% CI [0.04, 0.83]. Experiments 2 and 3 replicated this finding, showing that the effect was mediated by the belief that Black exonerees faced greater legal system bias than White exonerees (Experiment 2: B = 0.21, SE = 0.06, 95% CI [0.11, 0.33]; Experiment 3: B = 0.35, SE = 0.09, 95% CI [0.19, 0.55]). Our results also suggested that Black individuals react more favorably to Black than White exonerees, potentially because of their beliefs regarding legal system bias. Conclusions: People may react more favorably to Black than White exonerees because of the belief that Black exonerees face greater injustices within the legal system. Public Significance StatementThe public is becoming increasingly aware of the many ways in which the legal system is biased against Black people, and this awareness may influence their reactions to Black and White individuals who have been wrongfully convicted and exonerated (exonerees). We found evidence that university students (Black and non-Black alike) respond more positively to Black than White exonerees. This effect may be driven by a desire to avoid perpetuating racial biases against individuals who have been wronged by the criminal legal system.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The stigma of wrongful conviction differs for White and Black exonerees.

Faison¹,

Smalarz²,

Madon³

et al. 2023

Law and Human Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…be appropriate if we were interested in showing the complete, weighted causal chain from the independent to dependent variables by way of the mediators. We did not design our survey, however, to fulfill assumptions necessary to produce meaningful estimates while using casual mediation analysis (Chaudoin et al, 2021). Overall, our results show that public support for strikes is not generally moderated by strike attributes in the full sample, but that unilateral strikes are associated with lower levels of perceived legitimacy.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 80%

“…Causal mediation analysis would be appropriate if we were interested in showing the complete, weighted causal chain from the independent to dependent variables by way of the mediators. We did not design our survey, however, to fulfill assumptions necessary to produce meaningful estimates while using casual mediation analysis (Chaudoin et al, 2021).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multilateralism and public support for drone strikes

Lushenko

Raman

Kreps

2022

Research & Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of armed drones has emerged as a principal counterterrorism tool for western militaries, especially France and the United States. While France submits its strikes to the United Nations for approval, the United States typically does not. Does this difference matter for public support and perceptions of legitimacy? To better understand these dynamics, we fielded original survey experiments across nationally representative samples in France and the United States totaling in over 1800 respondents. Our results reflect that international approval is associated with both higher public support and greater perceived legitimacy for a strike. Further, we find that respondents emphasize international law as the basis for support and legitimacy, suggesting a cross-national belief in multilateralism for normative rather than strictly instrumental reasons. These relationships are moderated by the identity of the country conducting a hypothetical strike, implying both an “othering” effect and the emergence of distinct models of strikes across countries that deserve more study amid the ongoing proliferation of armed drones. Video Abstract: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YevyaKThae0

show abstract

“…We also asked respondents to assess the potential mediators following from the SCL framework: SCL. To counter the potential for order effects to influence our results (Chaudoin et al, 2021), we randomized the order of the mediators as well as whether they were asked to rate the mediators or intention to act first. For each mediator, respondents were asked to rate their perception of the information, again on a 0-100 scale, as follows (all translated from Spanish).…”

Section: Study Data and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Linking knowledge with action when engagement is out of reach: three contextual features of effective public health communication

Emmelhainz

Zarychta

Grillos

et al. 2021

Health Policy and Planning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scholars and practitioners often promote direct engagement between policymakers, health workers, and researchers as a strategy for overcoming barriers to utilizing scientific knowledge in health policy. However, in many settings public health officials rarely have opportunities to interact with researchers, which is a problem further exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. One prominent theory argues that policy actors will trust and utilize research findings when they perceive them to be salient, credible, and legitimate. We draw on this theory to examine the conditions facilitating greater uptake of new knowledge among health officials when engagement is out of reach and they are instead exposed to new ideas through written mass communication. Using data from a survey experiment with about 260 health workers and administrators in Honduras, we find that messages from a technocratic sender based on statistical evidence improved perceptions of salience, credibility and legitimacy. Additionally, perceptions of salience, credibility, and legitimacy are three contextual features that operate as joint mediators between knowledge and action, and several individual characteristics also influence whether officials trust research findings enough to apply them when formulating and implementing health policies. This research can help inform the design of context-sensitive knowledge translation and exchange strategies to advance the goals of evidence-based public health, particularly in settings where direct engagement is difficult to achieve.

show abstract

Survey Design, Order Effects, and Causal Mediation Analysis

Cited by 18 publications

References 9 publications

The stigma of wrongful conviction differs for White and Black exonerees.

The stigma of wrongful conviction differs for White and Black exonerees.

Multilateralism and public support for drone strikes

Linking knowledge with action when engagement is out of reach: three contextual features of effective public health communication

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About