American National Election Studies Research Articles

Authoritarianism, Prejudice, and Support for Welfare Chauvinism in the United States

Abstract This article examines the role of authoritarianism in shaping individual policy support for creating a waiting period before legal immigrants can access welfare programs. I use logistic regression models to analyse the opinions of non-Latino whites from the 1992 American National Election Study (ANES). I find that authoritarianism is related to a waiting period before immigrants can access welfare benefits, despite a significant number of non-authoritarians also preferring a waiting period. This effect is robust with the inclusion of several traditional predictors of welfare attitudes.

Economic anxiety or ethnocentrism? An evaluation of attitudes toward immigration in the U.S. from 1992 to 2017

ABSTRACT Does “economic anxiety” explain attitudes toward immigration or can we better understand attitudes toward immigration as an outcome of ethnocentrism? This is a long-standing empirical debate in immigration opinion research and a debate that has struggled to distinguish the relative effects. I help settle this debate with a battery of analyses on attitudes toward immigration across the American National Election Studies and Voter Study Group data, spanning analyses on immigration opinion for white Americans from 1992 to 2017 with economic data at levels as granular as the state, county, core-based statistical area (CBSA), and the ZIP code. My analyses are unequivocal that ethnocentrism is reliably the largest and most precise predictor of attitudes toward immigration. Further analyses and simulations from models most consistent with the economic anxiety argument show that a standard deviation increase in ethnocentrism is still a greater or equal magnitude effect than all economic anxiety proxies combined. I close with implications for immigration opinion research.

That Woman from Michigan: How Gender Resentment Shapes the Efficacy of Stay-at-Home Policies

AbstractThe United States has the highest number of COVID-19 cases, yet many Americans have responded indifferently toward policies designed to combat the spread of the virus. While nearly all 50 states have implemented some type of stay-at-home policy to encourage social distancing, there has been high variation in the degree of compliance. We argue that this variance is partly driven by gender resentment. Gender resentment reduces trust in female political leaders and thus decreases compliance with government policy and recommendations. Using data from SafeGraph and the 2016 American National Election Study, we demonstrate that the effect of stay-at-home policies on social distancing is reduced when gender resentment increases in states with female leaders. However, when gender resentment is low, there is no difference in the effect of policies on behavior. This research has important implications for understanding unseen barriers that can mediate the efficacy of female political leaders.

Personality traits are directly associated with anti-black prejudice in the United States.

Modern psychological theories postulate that individual differences in prejudice are determined by social and ideological attitudes instead of personality. For example, the dual-process motivational (DPM) model argues that personality does not directly associate with prejudice when controlling for the attitudinal variables that capture the authoritarian-conservatism motivation and the dominance motivation. Previous studies testing the DPM model largely relied on convenience samples and/or European samples, and have produced inconsistent results. Here we examined the extent to which anti-black prejudice was associated with the Big Five personality traits and social and ideological attitudes (authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, political party affiliation) in two large probability samples of the general population (N1 = 3,132; N2 = 2,483) from the American National Election Studies (ANES). We performed structural equation modeling (SEM) to test the causal assumptions between the latent variables and used survey weights to generate estimates that were representative of the population. Different from prior theories, across both datasets we found that two personality traits, agreeableness and conscientiousness, were directly associated with anti-black prejudice when controlling for authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, and political party affiliation. We also found that a substantial part of the associations between personality traits and anti-black prejudice were mediated through those social and ideological attitudes, which might serve as candidates for prejudice-reduction interventions in the real world.

A Re-examination of American National Election Studies to Resolve a Controversy About Who Overreports Turnout

A Re-examination of American National Election Studies to Resolve a Controversy About Who Overreports Turnout

Powerless Conservatives or Powerless Findings?

ABSTRACTNoting the lack of “anti-man” bias research in the 2016 election, Zigerell (2019) argued that a relative lack of conservatives in political science can lead to bias in publications against political science research supporting conservative viewpoints. This article offers an alternative explanation for this lack of research: that this research produces null findings and therefore is subject to the “file-drawer problem,” in which null effects are less likely to be published than positive effects. Using data from the 2016 American National Election Studies, I provide an illustrative example to support this claim and suggest some solutions.

The color of class politics: economic position, racial resentment, and attitudes about redistribution

ABSTRACT Racial resentment has been linked to opposition towards welfare programs for the poor and other redistributive policies. Theoretical work implies that because redistributive polices have been rhetorically linked to negative racial stereotypes, racially resentful whites will oppose redistributive policies, even when they might benefit from them. However, this proposition has not been empirically tested. Using the 2016 American National Election Study, we examine whether the relationship between racial resentment and a variety of economic policy attitudes is conditional by individuals’ income level. We find that the relationship between racial resentment and opposition to redistribution is weaker for lower income whites than for whites with higher incomes. When it comes to redistributive preferences, economic self-interest tempers the influence of racial resentment for lower income whites. For whites with higher incomes, however, the influence of racial resentment on redistributive preferences is significantly larger. This indicates that in the absence of directly benefiting from a redistributive policy, whites will oppose it if they harbor racial antipathy. We exploit the time series design of the ANES to demonstrate that these patterns hold across multiple election cycles (2004–2016).

How identity influences public attitudes towards the US federal government: lessons from the European Union

This study examines why Americans have positive or negative affect towards the US federal government. Specifically, it draws on existing theoretical and empirical research regarding individual attitudes towards the European Union, examining the effect of ethnocentrism on American attitudes towards the federal government. Relying on this existing research regarding the EU, it is hypothesized that those who are more ethnocentric will be more negative towards the US federal government. To test this expectation, we use longitudinal data from the American National Election Study from 1992 to 2012. We find those who are more ethnocentric are significantly more likely to possess negative attitudes towards the federal government. These findings have important implications for policymaking at both the federal and state levels, as well as party positioning both at the time of and between American elections, and the overall stability of multilevel governance in the United States. Additionally, the findings of this study indicate that theories designed to explain phenomena in the European Union are applicable to the US case.

The Curious Case of Black Conservatives: Construct Validity and the 7-point Liberal-Conservative Scale

Scholars have long puzzled over the existence of conservative-identifying black Americans who nonetheless identify with and vote for the Democratic Party. This paper resolves this paradox. Leveraging data from the American National Election Study, I demonstrate that the terms “liberal” and “conservative” are unfamiliar to many black Americans, rendering the commonly used 7-point liberal-conservative measure of ideology invalid for this population. Black respondents unfamiliar with these terms misapply them and choose ideological labels that fail to reflect their partisan preferences. Consequently, scholars and political actors make incorrect and imprecise inferences about the contours of black politics in the United States. Moreover, this article raises new concerns about the generalizability of claims that rely on ideological self-identification measures, including popular claims about polarization among the mass public. This work also suggests a need for caution when using concepts that vary in their meaningfulness across social groups.

Economic Vulnerability and Anti‐Immigrant Attitudes: Isolated Anomaly or Emerging Trend

ObjectiveDonald Trump's sustained emphasis on the negative impact of immigration policies for personal economic conditions necessitates reevaluating the influence of the latter on the former. We assess the interaction between income and individual economic anxiety on immigration attitudes.MethodsMultivariate analysis of the 2012 and 2016 American National Election Study survey data.ResultsAfter controlling for conventional explanations and standard political covariates, those who share an income bracket with foreign‐born workers and also expressed individual economic anxiety were significantly more likely to express negative attitudes toward immigrants in 2016, but not in 2012.ConclusionThe discrepancy between the results in 2016 and 2012 is partially attributed to the different rhetorical approaches toward immigration policy adopted by Donald Trump and Mitt Romney. Whether the 2016 results represent an isolated anomaly or emerging trend may depend on the rhetorical choices of future presidential candidates.

The Politics of White Racial Identity and Vote Choice in the 2018 Midterm Elections

ObjectivesThis article examines the role of white racial identity or white racial group consciousness in the vote choice of whites for the U.S. House of Representatives in the 2018 midterm elections.MethodsData from the 2018 American National Election Study (ANES) Pilot Study are analyzed using a logistic regression model.ResultsWhite racial consciousness was a significant predictor of U.S. House vote choice in 2018, even after controlling for other relevant explanatory variables such as racial resentment, party identification, and ideology. The effects were especially evident for two quintessential swing groups: independents and moderates.ConclusionIn the first national election of the Trump era, white racial group consciousness became a relevant electoral cleavage and determinant of white vote choice at the subpresidential level. Given the rhetoric and action of Trump as president, the Republican Party has morphed into a white identity political party, not dissimilar to populist right‐wing parties in Europe. While this might reap electoral benefits for the Republican Party in jurisdictions with smaller minority populations, it is likely to cost the party support where there is greater racial diversity. In the long term, the politics of white identity is likely to be an impediment to the Republican Party's ability to expand its electoral base.

Anti‐Vaccination Beliefs and Unrelated Conspiracy Theories

Much recent literature has examined the correlates of anti‐vaccination beliefs, without specifying the mechanism that creates adherence to these debunked ideas. We posit that anti‐vaccination beliefs are an outcome of a general psychological propensity to believe in conspiracies based on new research on the interconnectedness of conspiracy beliefs. These ideas are tested with a confirmatory factor analysis and a seemingly unrelated regression (SUR) model of a nationally representative U.S. sample from the 2016 American National Election Studies. The confirmatory factor analysis shows that anti‐vaccination beliefs highly correlate with belief in the unrelated conspiracies that Obama is a Muslim and 9/11 trutherism. Our SUR models also show that all three of these very different beliefs have similar predictors. All three have a negative correlation with political trust, political knowledge, education, and a positive correlation with authoritarianism. Thus, anti‐vaccination beliefs are shown to be part of a psychological propensity to believe in conspiracies.

Rights and Tolerance Support in U.S. Presidential Elections, 1992–2016

Do attitudes toward issues such as abortion, LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer) rights, and tolerance of diversity matter to U.S. voters and elections? Scholarship on rights and tolerance support has failed to take into account the potentially confounding influence of racial resentment as a factor behind voter choice. This is a serious limitation that we seek to address with American National Election Studies data for presidential elections from 1992 through 2016. We bring together for the first time rights and tolerance support and racial resentment, alongside further consideration of anti-immigrant sentiments and white identity. Racial resentment and anti-immigrant sentiments shape the behavior of voters, but there is new evidence for the large influence of rights and tolerance attitudes, including with respect to the 2016 presidential election. The results suggest a growing dependence of Democratic candidates on high levels of rights and tolerance support. We discuss implications for theory and research on voter choice.

Testing political knowledge as a mediator of the relationship between news use and affective polarization

ABSTRACT Fueled by news media, affective polarization is on the rise in the United States. This study tests the possibility that people learn to be polarized from news by investigating whether political knowledge mediates the relationship between news use and affective polarization. Analysis of the 2016 American National Election Studies (ANES) survey (N = 4,271) shows that news media use is associated with higher levels of political knowledge, and also that higher levels of political knowledge are associated with increases in affective polarization. We find that those who actively use news media are more likely to have political knowledge, which, in turn, leads them to have more polarized attitudes toward candidates. The findings of the current study are discussed in light of scholarly conversations on affective polarization in American politics.

Unresolved Politics: Implicit Ambivalence and Political Cognition

This paper introduces a novel framework for understanding the relationship between implicit and explicit preferences and political cognition. Existing work in political psychology focuses primarily on comparing the main effects of implicit versus explicit attitude measures. This paper rethinks the role of implicit cognition by acknowledging the correspondence between implicit and explicit preferences (i.e., the distance between implicitly and explicitly measured attitudes). Data from the 2008 American National Election Study are used to examine implicit racial ambivalence, or the gap between one’s implicit and explicit racial preferences, as it exists in the United States. Results indicate implicit racial ambivalence, which has been shown to yield effortful thinking related to race, is negatively related to education and Need for Cognition, and predicts race-related policy attitudes as well as vote choice in the 2008 election. Furthermore, implicit ambivalence moderates the influence of ideology on political attitudes, including attitudes toward outcomes that are only covertly related to race and cannot be predicted directly by implicit or explicit racial attitudes alone.

Latinos por Trump? Latinos and the 2016 Presidential Election

ObjectiveThis article examines the unresolved puzzle of the Latino vote in the 2016 presidential election. The National Election Pool (NEP) estimated that Trump received 28 percent, which surprised many given Trump's rhetoric, but it was just one of several estimates (ranging from 18 to over 30 percent).MethodsWe analyze the 2016 and 2012 American National Election Study, Pew's 2016 and 2012 National Survey of Latinos, the 2016 Cooperative Congressional Election Study, and various media polls.ResultsThe data indicate that (1) Trump improved on Romney among key groups of Latinos (Protestants, low income, and the third generation) but lost ground among others; (2) Clinton underperformed Obama across multiple dimensions; and (3) many Latino undecided voters and third‐party supporters broke late for Trump.ConclusionTrump did better than expected among Latinos. This highlights an increasingly diverse Latino electorate and complicates our understanding of the political implications of demographic change.

Confident and Skeptical: What Science Misinformation Patterns Can Teach Us About the COVID-19 Pandemic

As the COVID-19 pandemic has led to renewed focus on scientific misinformation, we take advantage of a December 2019 pilot study for the American National Election Study to analyze the US population's misinformation across a range of scientific topics. We find that people who are misinformed about scientific issues are confident in their beliefs, often as confident as those who hold correct beliefs. The misinformed also are less likely to trust experts and less likely to favor using scientific evidence in policy making than people who are not misinformed. These findings highlight the challenges of educating the public about COVID-19, particularly those who already are misinformed about the disease.

The Roots of Right-Wing Populism: Donald Trump in 2016

Using survey data from the American National Election Study (ANES) and aggregate data on Congressional districts, this article assesses the roles that economic and social factors played in Donald J. Trump’s 2016 “populist” presidential candidacy. It shows the hollowness of claims that economic issues played little or no role. While agreeing that racial resentment and sexism were important factors, the article shows how various economic considerations helped Trump win the Republican nomination and then led significant blocs of voters to shift from supporting Democrats or abstaining in 2012 to vote for him. It also presents striking evidence of the importance of political money and Senators’ “reverse coattails” in the final result.

A voter-centric explanation of the success of ideological candidates for the U.S. house

In recent years, ideological candidates for the U.S. House have become increasingly successful, to the point where their chances of being elected are indistinguishable from moderates. However, scholars have still not uncovered exactly why this is happening. Using survey data from the American National Election Studies, I find that voter-centric explanations of vote choice – a voter's partisanship, ideology, and presidential approval rating – have increasingly predicted their vote choice in U.S. House elections from 1980 to 2016. Using data on candidate ideology, I find that candidate ideology is an increasingly poor predictor of individual vote choice over time. Original experimental data supports these claims, finding only a small electoral advantage for moderates, compared to ideologues of their own party, and evidence suggesting that, at least among Democrats, ideological candidates are rated more favorably than moderates. Taken together, these results suggest that the increased electoral success of ideological candidates can be attributed to changes in voters' decision calculus, rather than structural or candidate-centric explanations.

Political Trust and Support for Immigration in the American Mass Public

AbstractImmigration is one of the most salient and important issues in contemporary American politics. While a great deal is known about how cultural attitudes and economics influence public opinion toward immigration, little is known about how attitudes toward government influence support for immigration. Using cross-sectional data from the American National Election Studies (ANES), panel data from the ANES and General Social Survey, as well a Mechanical Turk (MTurk) survey experiment, I show that political trust exerts a positive and substantively meaningful influence on Americans' support for immigration. Politically trustful individuals, both Democrats and Republicans, are more supportive of pro-immigration policies. These findings underscore the political relevance of trust in government and show that public attitudes toward immigration are not driven solely by feelings about immigrant groups, partisanship, core political values, nor personality traits, but are also affected by trust in government, the actor most responsible for managing immigration policy.