How subjective representations of citizenship affect political behavior: new forms of political participation in South America

How do citizens perceive political legitimacy and how does it affect the political behaviors of citizens in a less institutional way? On the one hand, political science has developed several theories about electoral behavior within the framework of institutional participation. However, the new forms of participation have not been studied in the same way, even if research has been done increasingly on the topic over the last years. An agreement is that the patterns of citizenship have been changing and a new citizenship’s conceptions have emerged. On the other hand, social psychology has been particularly interested to understand the perceived legitimacy in relation to authority and law at the individual level, which is closely related to new forms of participation. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to measure the relationship between subjective representations of citizenship (or group belonging) and the new forms of political participation. This paper is at the crossroad of social psychology and political science theory. A comparative analysis has been carried out focused on four South American countries that have been characterized by an increase in new forms of political participation since the recovered democracy to date. Data has been obtained from World Values Survey. Univariate and multivariate analysis has been applied. Results show that subjective representations of critical citizenship to the perception of an authoritarian context explain an increase of new forms of participation. This paper argues that subjective representations of citizenship have an effect in the new forms of political participation

EVS Trend File 1981-2017 – Sensitive Dataset

The European Values Study is a large-scale, cross-national and longitudinal survey research program on how Europeans think about family, work, religion, politics, and society. Repeated every nine years in an increasing number of countries, the survey provides insights into the ideas, beliefs, preferences, attitudes, values, and opinions of citizens all over Europe. The EVS Trend File 1981-2017 is constructed from the five EVS waves and covers almost 40 years. In altogether 160 surveys, more than 224.000 respondents from 48 countries/regions were interviewed. It is based on the updated data of the EVS Longitudinal Data File 1981-2008 (v.3.1.0) and the current EVS 2017 Integrated Dataset (v.5.0.0). For the EVS Trend File, a Restricted-Use File (ZA7504) is available in addition to the (factually anonymised) Scientific-Use File (ZA7503). The EVS Trend File – Sensitive Dataset (ZA7504) is provided as an add-on file. In addition to a small set of admin and protocol variables needed to merge with the SUF data, the Sensitive Dataset contains the following variables that could not be included in the scientific-use file due to their sensitive nature: W005_3 Job profession/industry (3-digit ISCO88) - spouse/partner EVS 2008W005_3_01 Job profession/industry (3-digit ISCO08) - spouse/partner EVS 2017W005_4 Job profession/industry (4-digit ISCO88) - spouse/partner EVS 2008X035_3 Job profession/industry (3-digit ISCO88) – respondent EVS 1999, EVS 2008 X035_3_01 Job profession/industry (3-digit ISCO08) - respondent EVS 2017X035_4 Job profession/industry (4-digit ISCO88) – respondent EVS 1999, EVS 2008 x048c_n3 Region where the interview was conducted (NUTS-3): NUTS version 2006 EVS 2008X048J_N3 Region where the interview was conducted (NUTS-3): NUTS version 2016 EVS 2017X049 Size of town (8 categories) EVS 2008, EVS 2017 Detailed information on the anonymization process in the EVS Trend File is provided in the EVS Trend File Variable Report

Many Labs 2: Investigating Variation in Replicability Across Samples and Settings

We conducted preregistered replications of 28 classic and contemporary published findings, with protocols that were peer reviewed in advance, to examine variation in effect magnitudes across samples and settings. Each protocol was administered to approximately half of 125 samples that comprised 15,305 participants from 36 countries and territories. Using the conventional criterion of statistical significance (p < .05), we found that 15 (54%) of the replications provided evidence of a statistically significant effect in the same direction as the original finding. With a strict significance criterion (p < .0001), 14 (50%) of the replications still provided such evidence, a reflection of the extremely high-powered design. Seven (25%) of the replications yielded effect sizes larger than the original ones, and 21 (75%) yielded effect sizes smaller than the original ones. The median comparable Cohen’s ds were 0.60 for the original findings and 0.15 for the replications. The effect sizes were small (< 0.20) in 16 of the replications (57%), and 9 effects (32%) were in the direction opposite the direction of the original effect. Across settings, the Q statistic indicated significant heterogeneity in 11 (39%) of the replication effects, and most of those were among the findings with the largest overall effect sizes; only 1 effect that was near zero in the aggregate showed significant heterogeneity according to this measure. Only 1 effect had a tau value greater than .20, an indication of moderate heterogeneity. Eight others had tau values near or slightly above .10, an indication of slight heterogeneity. Moderation tests indicated that very little heterogeneity was attributable to the order in which the tasks were performed or whether the tasks were administered in lab versus online. Exploratory comparisons revealed little heterogeneity between Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic (WEIRD) cultures and less WEIRD cultures (i.e., cultures with relatively high and low WEIRDness scores, respectively). Cumulatively, variability in the observed effect sizes was attributable more to the effect being studied than to the sample or setting in which it was studied