{"title":"Partisan and Ideological Bias Among the Attentive Public: Evidence From Witness Slips in the Illinois General Assembly","authors":"Michael Kistner, Michael Pomirchy","doi":"10.1111/lsq.70057","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Prior work conjectures that representational gaps may arise due to biases in who contacts politicians. However, direct measures of legislator contact by members of the public are elusive. This study leverages a unique data source to evaluate partisan and ideological bias in public outreach: witness slips in the Illinois General Assembly, online forms individuals can use to support or oppose specific pieces of legislation. Using these expressed positions, we document two key facts. First, witnesses are significantly more supportive of Republican-sponsored legislation than Democratic-sponsored legislation. Second, after estimating ideal points for witnesses, we find witnesses are ideologically closer to Illinois Republicans than Democrats. Additional analyses reveal important ideological heterogeneity by policy jurisdiction and interest group affiliation. Together, the results support one theoretical explanation of why legislators systematically mischaracterize public opinion: the views they are exposed to differ significantly from those of the general public.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47672,"journal":{"name":"Legislative Studies Quarterly","volume":"51 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Legislative Studies Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/lsq.70057","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Prior work conjectures that representational gaps may arise due to biases in who contacts politicians. However, direct measures of legislator contact by members of the public are elusive. This study leverages a unique data source to evaluate partisan and ideological bias in public outreach: witness slips in the Illinois General Assembly, online forms individuals can use to support or oppose specific pieces of legislation. Using these expressed positions, we document two key facts. First, witnesses are significantly more supportive of Republican-sponsored legislation than Democratic-sponsored legislation. Second, after estimating ideal points for witnesses, we find witnesses are ideologically closer to Illinois Republicans than Democrats. Additional analyses reveal important ideological heterogeneity by policy jurisdiction and interest group affiliation. Together, the results support one theoretical explanation of why legislators systematically mischaracterize public opinion: the views they are exposed to differ significantly from those of the general public.
期刊介绍：
The Legislative Studies Quarterly is an international journal devoted to the publication of research on representative assemblies. Its purpose is to disseminate scholarly work on parliaments and legislatures, their relations to other political institutions, their functions in the political system, and the activities of their members both within the institution and outside. Contributions are invited from scholars in all countries. The pages of the Quarterly are open to all research approaches consistent with the normal canons of scholarship, and to work on representative assemblies in all settings and all time periods. The aim of the journal is to contribute to the formulation and verification of general theories about legislative systems, processes, and behavior.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
