Partisan Polarization And Resistance To Elite Messages: Results From Survey Experiments On Social Distancing

COVID-19 compelled government officials in the U.S. and elsewhere to institute social distancing policies, shuttering much of the economy. At a time of low trust and high polarization, Americans may only support such disruptive policies when recommended by same-party politicians. A related concern is that some may resist advice from “elite” sources such as government officials or public health experts. We test these possibilities using novel data from two online surveys with embedded experiments conducted with approximately 2,000 Pennsylvania residents each, in spring 2020 (Study 1 in April and Study 2 in May-June). We uncover partisan differences in views on several coronavirus-related policies, which grew larger between surveys. Yet overall, Study 1 respondents report strong support for social distancing policies and high trust in medical experts. Moreover, an experiment in Study 1 finds no evidence of reduced support for social distancing policies when advocated by elites, broadly defined. A second experiment in Study 2 finds no backlash for a policy described as being backed by public health experts, but a cross-party decline in support for the same policy when backed by government officials. This suggests that, in polarized times, public health experts might be better advocates for collectively beneficial public policies during public health crises than government officials

Bringing “Behavioral” Fully Into Behavioral Public Administration

Behavioral economics is an increasingly influential field across the social sciences, including public administration. But while some behavioral economics ideas have spread rapidly in public administration research, we argue that a broader range of behavioral economics concepts can and should be applied. We begin by outlining some central models and concepts from behavioral economics to fix ideas, including the rational model and the “behavioral” response. We then discuss how a variety of heretofore underutilized behavioral economics concepts can be applied to a specific area of work in public administration – bureaucratic decision making. Our aim in doing so is two-fold. First, we hope to provide fresh food for thought for researchers and practitioners working in the broader behavioral public administration space. Second, we hope to demonstrate that there is substantial scope for expanding behavioral economics’ influence on public administration research

Emotions And Decisions In The Real World: What Can We Learn From Quasi-Field Experiments?

Researchers in the social sciences have increasingly studied how emotions influence decision-making. We argue that research on emotions arising naturally in real-world environments is critical for the generalizability of insights in this domain, and therefore to the development of this field. Given this, we argue for the increased use of the “quasi-field experiment” methodology, in which participants make decisions or complete tasks after as-if-random real-world events determine their emotional state. We begin by providing the first critical review of this emerging literature, which shows that real-world events provide emotional shocks that are at least as strong as what can ethically be induced under laboratory conditions. However, we also find that most previous quasi-field experiment studies use statistical techniques that may result in biased estimates. We propose a more statistically-robust approach, and illustrate it using an experiment on negative emotion and risk-taking, in which sports fans completed risk-elicitation tasks immediately after watching a series of NFL games. Overall, we argue that when appropriate statistical methods are used, the quasi-field experiment methodology represents a powerful approach for studying the impact of emotion on decision-making

Putting Social Rewards And Identity Salience To The Test: Evidence From A Field Experiment On Teachers In Philadelphia

We partnered with the School District of Philadelphia (SDP) to run a randomized experiment testing interventions to increase teacher participation in an annual feedback survey, an uncompensated task that requires a teacher’s time but helps the educational system overall. Our experiment varied the nature of the incentive scheme used, and the associated messaging. In the experiment, all 8,062 active teachers in the SDP were randomly assigned to receive one of four emails using a 2x2 experimental design; specifically, teachers received a lottery-based financial incentive to complete the survey that was either personal (a chance to win one of fifteen $100 gift cards for themselves) or social (a chance to win one of fifteen$100 gift cards for supplies for their students), and also received email messaging that either did or did not make salient their identity as an educator. Despite abundant statistical power, we find no discernible differences across our conditions on survey completion rates. One implication of these null results is that from a public administration perspective, social rewards may be preferable since funds used for this purpose by school districts go directly to students (through increased expenditure on student supplies), and do not seem less efficacious than personal financial incentives for teachers

Historical geographies of the future: airships and the making of imperial atmospheres

This article explores the elemental encounters and imaginative geographies of empire to develop a new means of engaging with the historical geographies of the future. Futures have recently become an important topic of historical and cultural inquiry, and historical geographers have an important role to play in understanding the place of the future in the past and in interrogating the role of posited futures in shaping action in historical presents. Drawing on literature from science and technology studies, a framework is developed for engaging with the material and imaginative geographies that coalesce around practices of imagination, expectation, and prediction. This framework is then used to reconstruct efforts to develop airship travel in the British Empire in the 1920s and 1930s. At a moment of imperial anxiety, airships were hoped to tie the empire together by conveying bodies, capital, and military capacity between its furthest points. Confident projections of the colonization of global airspace were nonetheless undermined by material encounters with a vibrant, often unpredictable atmospheric environment. The article aims to spur renewed work on the historical geographies of the future, while also contributing to debates on the cultural and political geographies of the atmosphere and of atmospheric knowledge making. Key Words: atmosphere, empire, future, mobility, technology

Partisanship, Messaging, And The COVID-19 Vaccine: Evidence From Survey Experiments

Purpose: To investigate partisanship in COVID-19 attitudes, and assess partisan or scientific messaging effects on COVID-19 vaccination intentions. Design: Two-wave survey with two-arm randomized experiment. Setting: Recruited Pennsylvania residents online. Sample: 2037 (May 2020) and 1577 (October 2020) Pennsylvania residents, aged 18–94 years. Intervention: Respondents saw messaging that presented either President Trump or scientists endorsing the vaccine, then reported their vaccination intentions. Measures: Likert scale items measuring COVID-19 attitudes (May), including mask wearing and vaccination intentions (May and October). Analysis: Partisan differences in attitudes were analyzed by chi-square; differences in support for mask wearing and vaccination intentions were also analyzed by Mann–Whitney U. The messaging experiment was analyzed by chi-square, Mann–Whitney U, and survey-weighted multivariate logistic regression. Results: Significant partisan differences were found in all attitudes. The partisan split in support for mask wearing increased from May to October, whereas the split in vaccination intentions decreased. Compared to partisan messaging, scientific messaging increased overall odds of intending to vaccinate by 32% in May (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]=1.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.06-1.65), and increased odds among Democrats by 142% in October (AOR = 2.42, CI = 1.29-4.55). Scientific messaging had no significant effect on independents or Republicans. Conclusion: Partisan COVID-19 attitudes were widespread and persistent. Partisan endorsement of the vaccine positively influenced those with congruent beliefs, while scientific messaging produced consistent effects across political affiliation