The representativeness of decision-making bodies relative to the population governed is a crucial factor for legitimacy. Most often, this principle is applied to elected bodies, but it equally pertains to appointed public officials. American presidents nominate individuals to lead executive bureaucracies that, in turn, influence and implement policy. However, in order to serve in these positions, nominees must pass through the constitutionally required Senate confirmation process. Using data from the full Biden administration, we explore how identity influences nominees’ experience of the appointments process and ultimately impacts the representativeness of American bureaucracies. The Biden administration represents a unique case, where a campaign promise to promote diversity in appointments led to a historic shift in nomination practice. Within these favorable conditions, we show that the Senate still serves as an obstacle to appointing a diverse slate of high-level officials, both in terms of delaying and denying such appointments. Evidence also suggests that group stereotypes continue to influence appointee placements. Our findings demonstrate the influence of individual characteristics beyond ideology in appointment politics and advance our understanding of identity within American institutions.

ABSTRACT This article locates Stellenbosch zoologist, C.S. (Coert) Grobbelaar at its centre to engage the history of physical anthropology and the study of race within a particular institutional, intellectual and political context at Stellenbosch University. An engagement with Grobbelaar’s career reveals that his scientific practice was deeply entrenched in political ideology. This was shaped by Afrikaner nationalism and a home institution which emphasised its intellectual connection with Germany rather than the Commonwealth in the interwar period. The alliance with Germany ultimately shaped Grobbelaar’s disciplinary orientation as well as the disciplinary identity of physical anthropology at Stellenbosch University. Grobbelaar pursued his science in the context of Afrikaner nationalism at an institution where science was meant to serve the interests of the Afrikaner volk. During his career Grobbelaar missed profound international departures in the study of race. He could ultimately not detach his scientific practice from the political context in which it operated.

Abstract Scholars and politicians often refer to a “Latino vote” or a shared set of Latino political attitudes. This paper argues that such characterizations are, in part, an artifact of analytically aggregating Latinos across distinct racial classifications. Disaggregating Latinos by racial self-classification reveals systematic political sorting along the broader U.S. racial hierarchy. Using data from the 2020 Collaborative Multiracial Post-Election Survey (CMPS), I examine how Latino racial self-classification and a new measure— Linked Fate Prioritization —shape political attitudes and behaviors. Analysis 1 shows that racial self-classification influences Latino political views; Latino whites tend to lean more conservative, Latino Blacks tend to lean more liberal, and Latinos who do not select a racial category tend to fallf between. Analysis 2 shows that among Latino whites, those who prioritize white linked fate over Latino linked fate tend to be more conservative and show less support for Black political causes. Taken together, these findings demonstrate that Latino political attitudes are structured by racial self-classification and linked fate prioritization, challenging the notion of a unified Latino political ideology and underscoring the importance of race in shaping Latino political behavior. I offer some theoretical explanations for these patterns.

Abstract The Chernobyl nuclear disaster of 1986 is a case study of organizational secrecy, rigid political ideology, and technological malfunctions that led to the most disastrous industrial accident. The analysis principally relies on the detailed account of Adam Higginbotham’s Midnight in Chernobyl, cross-examining technical and policy factors that resulted in such a catastrophe through the lens of three overlapping themes: (1) technical and human factors contributing to the accident, (2) the culture of secrecy and its outcomes as practiced by the Soviet Union and its impacts on disaster response and public health communication, and (3) lessons for the modern industrial safety governance and ethical transparency. The paper presents the human and environmental consequences of the disaster caused by institutional secrecy and authoritarian rigidity that delayed effective response and undermined public trust. It also provides policy recommendations to mitigate the likelihood of such catastrophe in future on the basis of transparency, independent oversight, and enhanced safety culture. Keywords Culture of Secrecy, Industrial Disasters, Safety Culture, Institutional Transparency, Nuclear Ethics

This study examines how moral rationalization and moral decoupling mediate consumers’ intentions to support and purchase brands engaged in political or social activism, and how political ideology moderates the relationship between attitudes and moral reasoning. Data collected from a U.S. Amazon M-Turk panel (n = 311) indicate that positive brand attitudes significantly influence both moral rationalization and moral decoupling. Moral rationalization enhances consumers’ intentions to support and purchase the brand, whereas moral decoupling reduces them. These findings suggest that when brands take a political stance, maintaining favorable consumer attitudes through superior product quality and service is crucial for sustaining support. The study further demonstrates that moral decoupling may have different effects across product categories, providing a novel contribution to the understanding of consumer responses in brand activism contexts.

Purpose The study aims to examine historical evolution of public relations in Yugoslavia. The purpose of the study is to understand if Yugoslavia, with a specific socialist model different from other communist countries, had a specific model and understanding of public relations that was differentiated from other countries that were part of both the Western and communist blocs. Design/methodology/approach 14 interviews with marketing and public relations persons active in times of former Yugoslavia. Document analysis of available sources. Findings Yugoslavia developed its own model of public relations that evolved from propaganda toward self-managed marketing-centric system in 1960s, with the rise of public relations, diversification and gaining global exposure in 1970s, with the full development of its own model and competition between the private and public sector in 1980s. Based on the review of the available literature and interviews conducted, it can be concluded that the Yugoslavian model of public relations was a hybrid model, which was grounded on the communication theories developed in the USA simultaneously and contextualized within the dominant Yugoslav political ideology of administrative Marxism. Originality/value The research is the first study that analyzes the development of public relations in the entire territory of former SFR Yugoslavia. It offers new perspective of public relations evolution and provides historical evidence about the development of a specific model.

ABSTRACT How can government elites influence public support for EU crisis policies? Policy legacies (memories of ‘deeds’, i.e., policy interventions of the EU) are one such crucial channel, but so far we have little evidence of their effects. By contrast, the literature has marshalled solid evidence on cueing (‘words’, i.e., how politicians talk about the EU influences citizens’ policy attitudes). We look at a crucial policy which may have a lasting legacy: the adoption of the pathbreaking NGEU package during COVID-19. We operationalise policy legacy with past policy satisfaction and by priming individuals with information about the positive and negative effects of the policy. We operationalise cues by randomly assigning individuals to conditions where they are exposed to messages from their national government. Overall, we observe a negativity bias for both policy legacies and cues, underlining the fragility of positive legitimacy-building efforts through both policy legacies and cues. While the effects of cues and legacies may compound, they do not seem to depend on each other. Concerning effect heterogeneity, EU trust and attitudes towards EU integration moderate the effect of cues and legacies but not left–right political ideology. Finally, cue effects are also stronger in creditors states.

Political ideology is increasingly shaping public attitudes toward environmental conservation; however, empirical research linking political beliefs and biodiversity conservation remains limited. This narrative review synthesizes 28 peer-reviewed studies identified through a systematic PRISMA-based search to examine how political ideology influences conservation attitudes and behaviors. This work draws on a variety of theories, including values and worldviews, moral foundations, cultural cognition, system justification, and social identity, to synthesize the evidence and develop a conceptual framework that guides future research. Our review suggests that political ideology primarily shapes conservation attitudes through psychological mechanisms related to values, risk perception, trust, and identity. These mechanisms are reinforced by elite cues and ideologically aligned media, creating barriers to consensus even on policies grounded in science. We advocate for greater attention to political ideology in conservation research and call for the use of theoretically grounded conceptual frameworks and multidimensional measures. By recognizing the political dimensions of conservation conflict, practitioners can design more inclusive policies and communication strategies that enhance legitimacy and foster broader public engagement across ideological divides.

Conservatives report much more favorable attitudes toward Confederate symbols (e.g., flags, monuments) than liberals. However, little work has examined factors that mediate or explain this robust political difference. Across two studies, we explored whether knowledge of historical racism mediates political differences in Confederate symbol attitudes. In a predominantly White internet sample ( N = 227, U.S. South), Study 1 found that the association between political conservatism and attitudes toward Confederate symbols was mediated by historical knowledge. Further, this mediation effect remained after adjusting for Southern identity. Study 2 replicated the predicted mediation effect in a racially diverse university sample and found that it obtains across racial-ethnic groups ( N = 557, U.S. Southeast). These results suggest that ignorance of historical racism helps to explain political differences in Confederate symbol attitudes. We discuss implications of these findings for research on the connection between historical knowledge and racial attitudes (i.e., the Marley hypothesis).

Large social media platforms are criticized for commodifying user data, corporate surveillance, and perceived censorship of political speech. As a result, some users flock to alternative platforms, like Telegram, Signal, VK, Parler, or Gettr. This study examines the roles of political ideology, anti-establishment views, and privacy concerns in the use of these five platforms. Based on survey data gathered in the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Canada, and Germany ( n = 1500 each), we find that alternative platform use is highest in the United States and in Germany. Digitally skilled, young, male, educated, and right-wing individuals are drawn to alternative social media. Across all five platforms, right-wing ideology is a stronger predictor of usage than anti-establishment views. In the pooled sample, privacy concerns do not correlate with usage. However, given inconsistencies in the roles of privacy concerns and anti-establishment views, we highlight the importance of specific platform affordances and national context.

Despite the fact that law-breaking or violent climate action tactics receive enormous media coverage, the psychological predictors of intentions to engage in these tactics remain poorly understood. This study examined demographic and psychological factors theoretically associated with conventional and radical climate intentions among 1427 self-identified supporters of climate action, tracked in three waves over 12 months. Conventional activism intentions were predicted by established models emphasising the role of moral conviction, anger, group identification, and group efficacy in shaping action. However, in the case of radical climate action, these variables were either weak predictors or non-significant predictors. Contrary to the notion that radical climate actors are driven by outgroup antipathy and ideological intensity, radical action intentions were positively associated with warmth and empathy toward climate change opponents, unrelated to political ideology, and negatively related to belief in climate change. Radical action intentions were also predicted by youth, personality, and-most strongly-the perception that people who support action on climate change have suffered more than opponents (collective victimhood). These findings suggest that theories require updating to account for the unique motivations associated with support for radical tactics in the climate change context. Findings have implications for activists and researchers seeking to understand the evolving landscape of climate protest and public support for disruptive activism.

This study analyzes 15,000 user comments from ideologically distinct news platforms—Fox News (right-leaning), ABC News (left-leaning), and BBC News (centrist)—to investigate how political ideology shapes emotional expression and engagement following the July 2024 assassination attempt on President Donald Trump in Pennsylvania. We examine whether right-leaning comments exhibit elevated anger and hate speech, whether left-leaning comments show greater empathy and positive affect, and how emotional intensity influences engagement metrics such as likes and shares. Using computational science methods, we trace the evolution of emotional tone and toxicity over time, focusing on affective polarization triggered by a high-salience violent event. Our findings reveal that ideological alignment amplifies engagement with congruent emotional content, reinforcing echo chambers and intensifying online hostility. We address gaps in understanding how ideological echo chambers amplify polarized emotions and online hostility following a high-profile violent event, emphasizing the place of emotions in contemporary political communication and digital news consumption.

ABSTRACT When striving to promote acceptance of marginalized groups through persuasive narratives, past research suggests that delaying disclosure of a character’s stigmatized identity can facilitate narrative involvement and promote message-consistent outcomes. In the present studies, we apply this strategy to the context of transgender individuals through two experiments that compared narratives which disclosed the protagonist’s identity at different points in the story (early or late). In findings that diverge from previous evidence, our results offer a complicated picture of narrative influence. In Study 1 (N = 334; story of transgender boy), early disclosure, rather than late, promoted greater identification and transportation and lower counterarguing. These variables mediated the relationship between disclosure timing and message-consistent outcomes such that participants in the early disclosure condition reported more favorable attitudes toward transgender individuals as well as greater interest in discussion and willingness to communicate with them. In Study 2 (N = 328; story of transgender girl), we found that the outcome variables were only significantly associated with political ideology. Both studies collected data from a politically diverse sample of U.S. adults.

Abstract Although consumers who engage in the same sustainable behaviors objectively have the same environmental impact, this research finds that people's perceptions of that impact are subjective and systematically shaped by political ideology. Seven studies demonstrate that conservatives tend to perceive their sustainable actions to have less of a positive impact on the environment than liberals do, which predicts conservatives' lower engagement in sustainable behaviors. This effect occurs not just because of their own climate change beliefs, but also because of the lower observed prevalence of sustainable behaviors in their in‐group. Consistent with this mechanism, when (a) the behavior is presented in a domain where it is seen as more prevalent among conservatives' ingroup members (i.e., health vs. sustainability), (b) the message emphasizes the prevalence of sustainable actions within the ingroup, or (c) impact is explicitly communicated, conservatives' perceptions of impact and their willingness to engage in sustainable behaviors increase. This work contributes to the literature on political ideology, highlighting effective ways to promote sustainable behavior across the political spectrum.

Multiple crises have marked the formative years of young adults. These crises heightened the need for information while also creating a large audience for misinformation. This article highlights digital resilience in four countries (the US, the UK, France, and Canada) and across different age groups, using a survey conducted in February 2021 at the apex of a series of crises. Based on a sample of 6,000 respondents, the two youngest age groups are more likely to use fact-checking websites, verify suspicious information, and report misinformation to social media platforms. These practices reflect digital resilience. In terms of cross-national differences, respondents from the US have higher use of fact-checking sites, which can be explained by the structural availability of these websites, which tend to focus on American content. In line with theories about uncertainty avoidance, respondents from France have higher rates of verification of suspicious information. Canada is distinctive in its low rates of misinformation reporting to social media platforms. While much of the scholarship has focused on political ideology as shaping engagement with misinformation, this study highlights generational differences, cultural differences, digital literacy programming, structural opportunities, and regulatory frameworks that may shape practices related to digital resilience.

Abstract A core claim of the administrative burden literature is that the experience of frictions during administrative encounters can generate psychological costs. Using a split-ballot survey experiment with a question order design (n = 3,812), we show that being asked to recall administrative encounters in a welfare program negatively affects people's psychological affect. Further, we show that the responses to burdens are asymmetric and consistent with a pattern of negativity bias in how people recall citizen-state encounters. Being asked to recall encounters induces negative affect, even though the majority of respondents reported having experienced low levels of administrative burden. Respondents' negative psychological reactions are driven by individuals who rated their experience as burdensome in survey questions or reported a bad experience in open-ended responses. Positive reported experiences were not associated with more positive affect. The results also suggest that the relationship between the experience of burden and negative affect is more pronounced for women, liberals, Whites, and those in poor or fair health. Moreover, those with neutral political ideology and those in very good or excellent health experienced decreased positive affect. A key theoretical implication is that the experience of psychological costs is shaped by negativity bias: negative interactions have a larger effect on outcomes than positive interactions. A practical implication is that governments should focus attention on reducing burdensome or otherwise negative encounters.

ABSTRACT Building on prior work that considers the relationship between ideology and public health outcomes, we test whether the ideology of elected representatives impacts individual health. We construct a novel metropolitan statistical area (MSA)‐level measure of political ideology based on the roll‐call votes of state legislators and examine its relationship to individual health using SMART BRFSS data. We hypothesize that individuals in more conservative MSAs will report worse health outcomes, due to greater skepticism of public health interventions and preference for individual liberty. Using OLS regressions with demographic and temporal controls, we find robust evidence that more conservative MSAs are associated with worse general, physical, and mental health. These findings suggest that political ideology may have a role in shaping health outcomes across the United States.

This research refines the concepts of progressive and regressive brand activism through a consumer-centric perspective. Across two experimental studies using different societal issues, we demonstrate that the perceived progressiveness/regressiveness of brand activism and its influence on brand attitudes emerges from a dynamic interaction between brand stance (conservative vs. liberal), consumers’ cultural tightness-looseness, and their political ideology. Our findings reveal that consumer evaluations of brand activism as either progressive or regressive are not universally determined by the brand’s position but vary systematically depending on individuals’ tolerance for social deviance and openness to change, as well as their political orientations. These insights suggest that brands engaging in activism must carefully account for the cultural and political characteristics of their target audiences, as consumer interpretations of brand activism can vary widely and significantly impact brand evaluations.

Purpose This study examines how Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) scores affect both the matching process between borrowers and lenders and the terms of syndicated loans. Design/methodology/approach The analysis concentrates on a comprehensive sample of syndicated loans to US firms. We estimate a set of linear models relating the borrower's ESG ratings to the bank's ESG ratings and to the loan conditions. Findings We find that firms with higher ESG scores are more likely to secure loans from banks that also have strong ESG ratings, especially in politically liberal states. Such firms also benefit from more favorable loan terms, including lower interest rates and a reduced number covenants. Originality/value This study highlights the dual role of ESG in influencing both borrower–lender matching and loan contracting outcomes. It also demonstrates that local political ideology amplifies the alignment between borrowers and lenders in terms of ESG, as well as the pricing of ESG ratings in loan contracting.

This study examines how Fox News and CTV News presented the 2025 tariffs on Canadian imports by US President Donald Trump. Using Entman’s four framing functions and Fairclough’s critical discourse analysis (CDA), the article explores how each media outlet defined the trade conflict, attributed causality, rendered moral judgments, and suggested policy responses. Drawing from fifty-two articles from Fox News and fifty-two articles from CTV News published between January 20 and April 30, 2025, the research employed a qualitative comparative research design that integrates framing analysis with textual-level CDA. This dual-method approach enabled the identification of both surface-level narrative structures and deeper ideological mechanisms embedded in discourse. The findings reveal two sharply divergent media narratives. Fox News framed the tariffs as a moral defense against a national security threat, emphasizing American sovereignty, victimhood, and executive resolve. CTV News portrayed the tariffs as politically motivated and economically harmful, and emphasized diplomatic norms, institutional responses, and measured retaliation. The study contributes to the literature by demonstrating how media framing not only shapes public understanding of trade conflicts but also reinforces divergent national identities, political ideologies, and economic nationalism.