Endorse or Not to Endorse: Understanding the Determinants of Newspapers’ Likelihood of Making Political Recommendations

This article investigates the determinants of newspapers’ provision for political opinion. I empirically examine the role of newspapers’ political preferences and market competition on newspapers’ decision to make endorsements. Regression results suggest that market competition turns newspapers more likely to make endorsements. Results from a simple model show that newspapers’ ideology determine their endorsements, making partisan papers more likely to make political recommendations and endorse challengers than non-partisan newspapers

The political influence of peer groups: experimental evidence in the classroom

People who belong to the same group often behave alike. Is this because people with similar preferences naturally associate with each other or because group dynamics cause individual preferences and/or the information that they have to converge? We address this question with a natural experiment. We find no evidence that peer political identification affects individual identification. But we do find that peer engagement affects political identification: a more politically engaged peer group encourages individual political affiliation to move from the extremes to the centre

The Role of Conferences on the Pathway to Academic Impact: Evidence from a Natural Experiment

We provide evidence for the effectiveness of conferences in promoting academic impact, by exploiting the cancellation - due to "Hurricane Isaac" - of the 2012 American Political Science Association Annual Meeting. We assembled a dataset of 29,000 articles and quantified conference effects, using difference-in-differences regressions. Within four years of being presented at the conference, an article's likelihood of becoming cited increases by five percentage points. We decompose the effects by authorship and provide an account of the underlying mechanisms. Overall, our findings point to the role of short term face-to-face interactions in the formation and dissemination of scientific knowledge

The Effects of Emergency Government Cash Transfers on Beliefs and Behaviours During the COVID Pandemic: Evidence from Brazil

This paper examines the impacts of emergency cash-transfers on individuals' social distancing behaviour and beliefs about COVID-19. We focus on the impacts of "Auxilio Emergencial" (AE): a large-scale cash-transfer in Brazil targeting low-income individuals who were unemployed or informally employed during the pandemic. To identify causal effects we exploit exogenous variation, arising from the AE design, in individuals' access to the cash-transfer programme. Using data from an online survey, our results suggest that eligibility to the emergency cash transfer led to a reduced likelihood of individuals contracting COVID-19, likely to have been driven by a reduction in working hours. Moreover, the cash transfer seems to have increased perceptions about the seriousness of coronavirus, while also exacerbating misconceptions about the pandemic. These findings indicate effects of emergency cash-transfers in determining individuals' narratives about a pandemic, in enabling social distancing and potentially in reducing the spread of the disease