American Political Science Research Articles

RETRACTED ARTICLE: Analysing the political effects of ‘fake news’ deflections in the UK

We, the Editors and Publisher of West European Politics, have retracted the following article: Ric Neo (2023) ‘Analysing the political effects of ‘fake news’ deflections in the UK’, West European Politics, DOI: 10.1080/01402382.2023.2211836, published online on 21 June 2023. Since publication, significant concerns have been raised about overlaps in concept, theory and design with work made available as a conference panel paper by Kaylyn Jackson Schiff, Daniel Schiff and Natália Bueno in 2020, a precursor to their paper recently published in the American Political Science Review. Schiff, Kaylyn Jackson, Daniel Schiff, and Natália S. Bueno. 2020. ‘The Liar’s Dividend: How Deepfakes and Fake News Affect Politician Support and Trust in Media’. Presented at APPAM in November 2020. Schiff, Kaylyn Jackson, Daniel S. Schiff, and Natália S. Bueno. 2024. ‘The Liar’s Dividend: Can Politicians Claim Misinformation to Evade Accountability?’ American Political Science Review. Published online 2024:1–20. doi: 10.1017/S0003055423001454. Upon query, the author has not been able to provide a satisfactory explanation for this significant level of overlap and the inadequacy of accreditation. As this is a serious breach of our Editorial Policies, we are retracting the article from the journal. The author has agreed to retract the article. We have been informed in our decision-making by our policy on publishing ethics and integrity and the COPE guidelines on retractions. The retracted article will remain online to maintain the scholarly record, but it will be digitally watermarked on each page as ‘Retracted’.

Submitting to Politics & Gender: Advice from the Editors

For nearly 20 years, Politics & Gender has been a leading outlet for research on women, gender, and politics. As past and current editors,1 we are happy to share our advice for early career researchers interested in submitting manuscripts to the journal. We believe that as the official journal of the Women, Gender, and Politics Section of the American Political Science Association, the content of Politics & Gender should reflect the diversity of authors, methods, and topics found across the broader gender and politics research community. However, not all authors have the full information on how to best prepare their manuscripts—or, indeed, what to expect during different parts of the review process (see Anlar and Phillips 2023).

Report of the Editors of Perspectives on Politics to the American Political Science Association Council, 2022-2023

An abstract is not available for this content. As you have access to this content, full HTML content is provided on this page. A PDF of this content is also available in through the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Exiled Activists Mobilize Online

Exile—the banishment of individuals from their home country—is a commonly used form of repression against activists, dissidents, and other political opponents. The aftermath of exile usually limits opposition influence and weakens home-country networks. However, while banishment may keep exiles physically away from home, it does not keep political opponents from promoting their agendas from abroad. In a new article published in the American Political Science Review, authors Jane Esberg and Alexandra A. Siegel demonstrate how exile affects political opponents’ online activism. Their research highlights the importance of digital technologies and social media as an accessible and powerful political tool.

FPG-AFSP associate group panels American Political Science Association Meetings August 30th–September 1, Los Angeles

FPG-AFSP associate group panels American Political Science Association Meetings August 30th–September 1, Los Angeles

The Realities Facing Graduate Students: Before, During, and After the 2020 COVID-19 Pandemic

ABSTRACT Committees from the American Political Science Association (APSA) on the status of graduate students in political science conducted digital surveys in 2018, 2020, and 2022. Distributed using listservs from APSA, the surveys asked about a range of realities facing graduate students including employment opportunities, industry or academic support, and overall well-being. Analysis of the data pre-, during-, and post-pandemic revealed high anxiety in 2018 as part of students’ experience looking for jobs. By 2020 and 2022, anxiety worsened, such that the well-being of graduate students in political science should be addressed. We recommend a change in the structure of graduate academic programs to include stronger institutional support and an emphasis on alternative paths for work that does not entail teaching at an academic institution.

Twenty-first-century feminismos: women's movements in Latin America and the Caribbean

Simone Bohn and Charmain Levy's Twenty-first-century feminismos offers a thorough exploration of recent women's and feminist movements in eight countries across Latin America and the Caribbean. Divided into ten chapters, the volume traces the local, national and transnational histories, as well as the socio-political dynamics of feminist mobilizing. Its varied, in-depth case-studies provide an overview of the contemporary movements in light of the historical developments of the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. This interdisciplinary book makes important contributions to various fields, including gender studies, Latin American studies and political science. Despite its breadth and diversity, there are recurring themes that emerge throughout the chapters. These fall into three broad categories: struggles for autonomy (be it reproductive, Indigenous or anti-imperialist); alliances and tensions between institutional and autonomous approaches to social change; and the production of knowledge grounded in the lived experiences of the movements. This last point is further reflected in the composition of the volume, as more than half of the chapters are translated from French, Spanish or Portuguese. Hence, the contributors provide insights into new sites of analysis and theorizing within anglophone literature.

Modeling Spatial Heterogeneity and Historical Persistence: Nazi Concentration Camps and Contemporary Intolerance

A wealth of recent research in comparative politics examines how spatial variation in historical conditions shapes modern political outcomes. In an article in the American Political Science Review, Homola, Pereira, and Tavits argue that Germans who live nearer to former Nazi concentration camps are more likely to display out-group intolerance. Clarifying the conceptual foundations of posttreatment bias and reviewing the historical record on postwar state creation in Germany, we argue that state-level differences confound the relationship between distance to camps and out-group intolerance. Using publicly available European Values Survey data and electoral results from 2017, we find no consistent evidence that distance to camps is related to contemporary values. Our findings have implications for literatures on historical persistence, causal inference with spatial data, Holocaust studies, and outgroup tolerance.

Challenges with Studying Islamist Groups in American Political Science

In this paper, I will explain why the lack of debate between political theory and comparative politics has led to an inadequate understanding of the politics of traditional Islamic scholars and Islamists in American political science. In the first section, I analyze the impact of the text-based approach of political theory; in the second, of the liberal frameworks of comparative politics; and in the third, a promising new development: the interdisciplinary field of Islamic legal studies, which has the potential to bridge the division between political science, law, and area studies approaches to the study of Muslim societies. I argue that the reliance of political theorists on seminal Islamist texts, rather than on the interpretations of texts during legal and political processes, limits their ability to represent the evolution of pragmatic Islamist theory in countries such as Pakistan. Moreover, whereas political theorists, such as Lucas Swaine, have demonstrated the futility of applying liberal assumptions to theocrats, comparativists continue to predominantly rely on liberal categories and frameworks, which produces a distorted view of Islamists. The division of labor between political theory and comparative politics, and the lack of conversation that results from it, makes it difficult—if not impossible—to fairly represent or analyze contemporary Islamist groups in American political science.

Islam, Authoritarianism, and Underdevelopment

In 2019 Professor Ahmet Kuru published his acclaimed Islam, Authoritarianism, and Underdevelopment: A Global and Historical Comparison. I say ‘acclaimed’ not as an endorsement but merely to point to accolades it received, such as the jointly awarded and prestigious 2020 American Political Science Association’s Jervis-Schroeder Book Award. Moreover, it was keenly promoted by Kuru and publishers via a global book tour including Harvard, on top of receiving reviews in Foreign Affairs and numerous political science and history journals. More recently, its arguments featured in a widely reported op-ed penned by former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair in the wake of the Taliban reconquest of Afghanistan, where he characteristically decries ‘Islamism’ as “a first-order security threat to the west”.

Power from Below: An Interview with Nargess Mustapha, Co-Founder of Hoodstock (2022 Cloward & Piven Award Recipients)

Every year, the caucus for critical political science of the American Association of Political Science grants the Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven Award to an activist group in the region of the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association (APSA). In 2022, APSA took place in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. This year’s recipient of the award is Hoodstock, a movement-based organization that aims to eliminate systemic inequalities and build supportive, inclusive, safe, and vibrant communities. The author and interviewer is a graduate student in Political Science at McGill University where she conducted fieldwork on people power and intersectional organizing in Montreal. In the following piece, she interviews one of the cofounders of Hoodstock.

WALTER DEAN BURNHAM: In Memory and Appreciation

Dean Burnham, who died in San Antonio in October at the age of ninety-two, was an active and enthusiastic supporter of this journal from its inception. His loss deprives editors and managing editors of his energetic and assiduous counsel, especially regarding any writings or commentaries devoted to political parties, elections, political realignments, political polling, and the deep literature on the evolution of American democracy from originalist founding days to the rise of reactionary recent presidents.Because this journal was originally housed at MIT, it was both convenient and illuminating to stroll into Burnham’s office and ask his opinion about a submission or about an idea for a special issue, or to request advice about some aspect of American or European political development. Burnham would always answer the precise questions and then, unprompted, provide context and a compendium of intellectual discourse related to the inquiry. He was integral to the growth of the JIH from its formative years, and ever since.A student of Harvard University’s V.O. Key, Burnham in 1965 published a defining article on declining voter turnout, “The Changing Shape of the American Political Universe,” in the American Political Science Review. Among his many seminal books were Critical Elections and the Mainsprings of American Politics (1970), Democracy in the Making: American Government and Politics (1986), and Voting in American Elections: The Shaping of the American Political Universe Since 1788 (2009). In 2014, he co-wrote—with Thomas Ferguson, a former student—“Americans Are Sick to Death of Both Parties: Why Our Politics Are in Worse Shape Than We Thought,” a study of the 2014 American elections. He also commented in print on the 2016 “change election” that brought Donald Trump to the presidency. As the New York Times’ obituary indicated, Burnham was “one of the most influential political scientists of his generation.” Among Burnham’s many intellectual contributions to this journal was his path-breaking article, “Those High Nineteenth-Century American Voting Turnouts: Fact or Fiction?” XVI (1986), 613–644.Before joining the MIT political science department in 1971, Burnham had taught at Boston University, Kenyon College, Haverford College, and Washington University. In 1988, he departed MIT for the University of Texas, Austin. His students there were as devoted to his breadth of learning and his clever wit as those at MIT had been.Burnham was profoundly interdisciplinary in his interests, his discourse, and his approach to political and social history. He extolled the craft of translating compelling theories and concepts into accessible articles and books, thus contributing mightily to the fashioning and qualitative uplifting of this journal for decades. The JIH’s readers and editors will sadly miss his profound insights and unparalleled wisdom.

Climate and the American Political Science Association

Climate and the American Political Science Association

Misinformation in Experimental Political Science

The American Political Science Association recently cautioned against the use of misinformation (giving research participants false information about the state of the world) in research with human subjects. This recommendation signals a growing recognition, as experimental research itself grows in prevalence in political science, that deceptive practices pose ethical problems. But what is wrong with misinformation in particular? I argue that while this question certainly has an ethical dimension, misinformation is bad for inference too. Misinformation moves us away from answering questions about the political world effectively. I propose a straightforward, intuitive solution to this twofold problem: tell the truth.

Change-Point Detection and Regularization in Time Series Cross-Sectional Data Analysis

AbstractResearchers of time series cross-sectional data regularly face the change-point problem, which requires them to discern between significant parametric shifts that can be deemed structural changes and minor parametric shifts that must be considered noise. In this paper, we develop a general Bayesian method for change-point detection in high-dimensional data and present its application in the context of the fixed-effect model. Our proposed method, hidden Markov Bayesian bridge model, jointly estimates high-dimensional regime-specific parameters and hidden regime transitions in a unified way. We apply our method to Alvarez, Garrett, and Lange’s (1991, American Political Science Review 85, 539–556) study of the relationship between government partisanship and economic growth and Allee and Scalera’s (2012, International Organization 66, 243–276) study of membership effects in international organizations. In both applications, we found that the proposed method successfully identify substantively meaningful temporal heterogeneity in parameters of regression models.

Public administration and political science: From monogamous marriage to professional partnership

Public administration and political science: From monogamous marriage to professional partnership

Introduction: Entrenchment and Health Equity.

Introduction| September 27 2022 Introduction: Entrenchment and Health Equity Eric M. Patashnik Eric M. Patashnik Brown University Eric M. Patashnik is Julis-Rabinowitz Professor of Public Policy, professor of political science, and chair of the Department of Political Science at Brown University. Patashnik is also a nonresident senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and a fellow of the National Academy of Public Administration. Patashnik is the author and editor of several books including Unhealthy Politics: The Battle over Evidence-Based Medicine (with Alan Gerber and Conor Dowling, Princeton University Press, 2017) and Reforms at Risk: What Happens After Major Policy Changes Are Enacted (Princeton University Press, 2008). He has served as president of the Public Policy Section of the American Political Science Association and is a former editor of Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law.eric_patashnik@brown.edu Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google J Health Polit Policy Law 10234128. https://doi.org/10.1215/03616878-10234128 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Permissions Search Site Citation Eric M. Patashnik; Introduction: Entrenchment and Health Equity. J Health Polit Policy Law 2022; 10234128. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/03616878-10234128 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search Books & JournalsAll JournalsJournal of Health Politics, Policy and Law Search Advanced Search The text of this article is only available as a PDF. Copyright © 2022 by Duke University Press2022 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal Issue Section: Introduction You do not currently have access to this content.

Daniel Robert McClure. Winter in America: A Cultural History of Neoliberalism from the 1960s to the Reagan Revolution. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2021. Pp. 464. $95.00 (cloth); $34.95 (paper).

Previous articleNext article No AccessBook ReviewsDaniel Robert McClure. Winter in America: A Cultural History of Neoliberalism from the 1960s to the Reagan Revolution. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2021. Pp. 464. $95.00 (cloth); $34.95 (paper).Jefferson DeckerJefferson DeckerRutgers University Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUSFull Text Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by American Political Thought Volume 11, Number 4Fall 2022 Published in association with the American Political Thought organized section of the American Political Science Association and the Jack Miller Center Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/722110 Views: 19Total views on this site For permission to reuse, please contact [email protected]PDF download Crossref reports no articles citing this article.

Kathleen Belew and Ramón A. Gutiérrez, eds. A Field Guide to White Supremacy. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2021. Pp. 424. $85.00 (cloth); $24.95 (paper).

Previous articleNext article No AccessBook ReviewsKathleen Belew and Ramón A. Gutiérrez, eds. A Field Guide to White Supremacy. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2021. Pp. 424. $85.00 (cloth); $24.95 (paper).Ramon LopezRamon LopezClemson University Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUSFull Text Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by American Political Thought Volume 11, Number 4Fall 2022 Published in association with the American Political Thought organized section of the American Political Science Association and the Jack Miller Center Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/722114 Views: 50Total views on this site For permission to reuse, please contact [email protected]PDF download Crossref reports no articles citing this article.

Bryan M. Santin. Postwar American Fiction and the Rise of Modern Conservatism: A Literary History, 1945–2008. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021. Pp. 290. $99.99 (cloth).

Previous articleNext article No AccessBook ReviewsBryan M. Santin. Postwar American Fiction and the Rise of Modern Conservatism: A Literary History, 1945–2008. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021. Pp. 290. $99.99 (cloth).Brian DanoffBrian DanoffMiami University Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUSFull Text Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by American Political Thought Volume 11, Number 4Fall 2022 Published in association with the American Political Thought organized section of the American Political Science Association and the Jack Miller Center Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/722113 Views: 30Total views on this site For permission to reuse, please contact [email protected]PDF download Crossref reports no articles citing this article.