Hidden Sources of Anti-Muslim Attitudes:Joint Effects of Interactions and Exposure to Out-Groups

Interactions between social identity groups can reduce perceptions of threatening out-groups and improve inter-group attitudes. But these interactions have an inevitable side effect: while an interaction may improve attitudes among its participants, the same interaction can increase exposure to out-groups in the proximity of the interaction, leading to increased perceptions of threat among those not participating in the interaction. With such negative externalities in mind, this paper argues that the presence of a large number of out-group members both improves and aggravates native attitudes toward out-groups in the same area, which may, in the aggregate, conceal a hot spot of anti-immigration attitudes. This study examines the effects of interaction and exposure through a series of surveys of native attitudes toward Muslim immigrants in the Netherlands. While the exposure effect was not observed, empirical analyses suggest that brief interactions tend to worsen negative attitudes toward Muslims, possibly due to their physical and religious appearances. This highlights the importance of visual cues in shaping inter-group relations, as these visual cues may prompt natives to sort out interactions based on appearance, hindering efforts to promote inter-group contact between Muslims and non-Muslims

The paradoxical effect of welfare knowledge:Unveiling income cleavage over attitudes to welfare in South Korea

The extent of the rich–poor divide in attitudes to welfare varies across societies. Existing studies focus on the progressivity of the welfare system and macroeconomic conditions to explain cross-society variation. We shed light on another factor that we believe is key to understanding the variation: the public’s knowledge of the welfare state. We suggest that the prevalent ignorance of how welfare state institutions work dilutes the rich–poor divide over social spending, especially in emerging welfare states. We empirically illustrate our point using original survey data from South Korea, a country where previous studies repeatedly found little or no effect of economic class on welfare state attitudes. We reveal a strong income-based cleavage over social spending in a subset of the Korean population with more accurate knowledge of the welfare system. Our findings carry important implications for understanding and projecting welfare state politics in a broader set of emerging welfare states

Multifaceted effects of globalisation on welfare attitudes:When winners and losers join forces

How does economic globalisation influence individuals’ welfare state preferences? Moving beyond the unidimensional understanding of globalisation exposure, we intersect two dimensions of exposure perceptions (gain vs loss and individual vs societal impacts) and propose a novel typology: collective winner, lone winner, lone loser and collective loser. We then explain the preference gap among losers (collective losers vis-à-vis lone losers) and among winners (collective winners vis-à-vis lone winners) by considering three distinct motivations for welfare state support: compensation, risk-pooling and inequality reduction. We illustrate the usefulness of our typology using an original survey in South Korea. We find that lone winners are far more supportive of welfare spending than collective winners. At the same time, collective losers are found to be much more supportive of welfare spending than lone losers. We provide some first-cut evidence that the insurance-seeking motivation common to lone winners and collective losers drive their welfare state support

Varieties of Public Attitudes toward Immigration:Evidence from Survey Experiments in Japan

What factors shape attitudes toward immigration? Previous studies have typically debated whether citizens oppose immigration more for economic or cultural reasons. We broaden this debate by exploring how different segments of the citizenry feel about immigration. Our original surveys conducted in Japan reveal two separate axes along which many citizens view immigration: (1) its cultural and economic effects, and (2) its positive and negative effects. Even in Japan, whose relatively closed policy toward immigration is conventionally believed to reflect widespread public intolerance of outsiders, over 60 percent of our respondents favor widening the doors to immigrants for economic or cultural reasons or both

The Fiscal Politics of Immigration:Expert Information and Concerns over Fiscal Drain

Recent studies find that fiscal concerns strongly condition public attitudes toward immigration. To what extent do expert cues affect these worries? Original survey experiments in Japan reveal that citizens are more easily swayed by experts warning against negative fiscal effects of immigration than they are by suggestions of possible positive economic or cultural impacts. This strong responsiveness to negative information is shared across the population, including the more educated who may be pro-immigrant, richer respondents who are less likely to depend on the government for their livelihoods, and younger respondents who may worry less about possible cuts in benefits. A follow-up survey four years after the initial survey confirms the reliability of our findings and also suggests some macro-level variables that condition how expert cues work

The Impact of Municipal Mergers on Local Public Spending:Evidence from Remote-Sensing Data

How are resources distributed when administrative units merge? We take advantage of recent, large-scale municipal mergers in Japan to systematically study the impact of municipal mergers within merged municipalities and, in particular, what politicians do when their districts and constituencies suddenly change. We argue that when rural and sparsely populated municipalities merge with more urban and densely populated municipalities, residents of the former are likely to see a reduced share of public spending because they lost political leverage through the merger. Our empirical analyses detect changes in public spending before and after the municipal mergers with remote sensing data, which allows for flexible units of analysis and enables us to proxy for spending within merged municipalities. Overall, our results show that politicians tend to reduce benefits allocated to areas where there are a small number of voters, while increasing the allocation to more populous areas. The micro-foundation of our argument is also corroborated by survey data. The finding suggests that, all things being equal, the quantity rather than quality of electorates matters for politicians immediately after political units change

The Role of Public Broadcasting in Media Bias:Do People React Differently to Pro-government Bias in Public and Private Media?

People often reject new information, especially when it does not fit their prior beliefs. But do publics in advanced democracies reject information from public and private media outlets in the same way? We examine this question in the form of the media’s pro-government bias in the under-examined case of Japan. By combining unique textual data with an original survey experiment, we document that (1) people generally tend to reject pro-government biased information that overly praises government actions; but (2) the reasons why people reject the same biased information vary—based on their expectations of neutrality for public media, and on expectations derived from political ideology for private media. Our study suggests that the basis of people’s motivated reasoning differs when they evaluate content from public and private media

Distributional concerns and public opinion:EV subsidies in the U.S. and Japan

This paper explores whether perceptions about distributive inequity shape public support for energy transition policies. The introduction of electric vehicles (EVs) is an important policy priority for the decarbonization of road transportation. Because high sticker prices restrict EV sales, governments offer consumers EV subsidies. However, some are concerned that subsidies may favor certain groups and industries. Using a conjoint experiment, we examine the public preference for EV subsidies in the U.S. and Japan.,. In the U.S., there is a concern that EV subsidies help the high-income (i.e., individual-focused concerns), while the prevailing concern in Japan is whether they favor foreign companies which are the first movers in the EV industry (i.e., industry-focused concerns). We embed a vignette experiment within the conjoint experiment to prime the respondents with individual- and industry-focused distributional concerns. In both countries, regardless of the priming they received, our respondents favor universalistic subsidies that are inclusive of the high-income and luxury/foreign cars to subsidies that are more progressively targeted (i.e., exclusive of the rich and luxury cars) or favoring domestic firms. As such, recent EV policy discourse centering on distributional politics does not appear to reflect public opinion

Voter responses to female candidates' voice pitch:experimental evidence from Japan

Politicians' voice pitch is known to affect voters' evaluation of the candidates in the US. But to what extent is this true outside of the American context? To address this question, we conducted an original survey experiment in Japan. Our findings are threefold. First, in contrast to previous studies, voters in Japan do not systematically prefer lower-pitched over higher-pitched female politicians. Second, our findings suggest heterogeneity in the effect of voice pitch by voters' gender – while Japanese women are indifferent as to female candidates' pitch levels, men are more likely to prefer female candidates who speak at lower pitch. Third, preliminary analyses reveal limited evidence that female candidates' political experience conditions the effect of voice pitch over voters' willingness to vote for that candidate. Our findings suggest that lowering pitch is likely to increase female candidates' electoral prospects by attracting male voters without backlash from female voters

Hawkish Partisans:How Political Parties Shape Nationalist Conflicts in China and Japan

It is well known that regime types affect international conflicts. This article explores political parties as a mechanism through which they do so. Political parties operate in fundamentally different ways in democracies vs. non-democracies, which has consequences for foreign policy. Core supporters of a party in a democracy, if they are hawkish, may be more successful at demanding hawkish behavior from their party representatives than would be their counterparts in an autocracy. The study draws on evidence from paired experiments in democratic Japan and non-democratic China to show that supporters of the ruling party in Japan punish their leaders for discouraging nationalist protests, while ruling party insiders in China are less likely to do so. Under some circumstances, then, non-democratic regimes may be better able to rein in peace-threatening displays of nationalism