Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Grand Old (Tailgate) Party?: Partisan Discrimination In Apolitical Settings, Andrew M. Engelhardt, Stephen M. Utych
Grand Old (Tailgate) Party?: Partisan Discrimination In Apolitical Settings, Andrew M. Engelhardt, Stephen M. Utych
Political Science Faculty Publications and Presentations
Recent work in political science demonstrates that the American public is strongly divided on partisan lines. Levels of affective polarization are so great, it seems, that partisanship even shapes behavior in apolitical settings. However, this literature does not account for other salient identity dimensions on which people make decisions in apolitical settings, potentially stacking the deck in favor of partisanship. We address this limitation with a pair of experiments studying price discrimination among college football fans. We find that partisan discrimination exists, even when the decision context explicitly calls attention to another social identity. But, importantly, this appears to function …
Man Bites Blue Dog: Are Moderates Really More Electable Than Ideologues?, Stephen M. Utych
Man Bites Blue Dog: Are Moderates Really More Electable Than Ideologues?, Stephen M. Utych
Political Science Faculty Publications and Presentations
Are ideologically moderate candidates more electable than ideologically extreme candidates? Historically, both research in political science and conventional wisdom answer yes to this question. However, given the rise of ideologues on both the right and the left in recent years, it is important to consider whether this assumption is still accurate. I find that, while moderates have historically enjoyed an advantage over ideologically extreme candidates in congressional elections, this gap has disappeared in recent years, where moderates and ideologically extreme candidates are equally likely to be elected. This change persists for both Democratic and Republican candidates.