Strategic Discrimination in the 2020 Democratic Primary

IF 2.9 1区 社会学 Q1 COMMUNICATION
Jon Green, Brian F. Schaffner, Sam Luks
{"title":"Strategic Discrimination in the 2020 Democratic Primary","authors":"Jon Green, Brian F. Schaffner, Sam Luks","doi":"10.1093/poq/nfac051","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Primary voters frequently support the candidates they think have a greater chance of winning the general election over the candidates who most closely reflect their policy preferences—a perception referred to as “electability.” While electability is typically taken to mean ideological moderation, recent research highlights the potential for candidates’ demographic characteristics to affect such perceptions. Using a conjoint experiment conducted with a sample of nearly 3,000 likely Democratic primary voters in June 2019, we show that women and candidates of color were seen as less electable than their white, male counterparts despite being preferred more frequently, holding policy stances and general election strategies constant. These effects were independent of respondents’ hostile sexism and racial resentment, and mediation analysis indicates that electability concerns reduced overall support for women and candidates of color. The results replicate and extend recent findings related to “strategic discrimination” in the US electorate.","PeriodicalId":51359,"journal":{"name":"Public Opinion Quarterly","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Opinion Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfac051","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Primary voters frequently support the candidates they think have a greater chance of winning the general election over the candidates who most closely reflect their policy preferences—a perception referred to as “electability.” While electability is typically taken to mean ideological moderation, recent research highlights the potential for candidates’ demographic characteristics to affect such perceptions. Using a conjoint experiment conducted with a sample of nearly 3,000 likely Democratic primary voters in June 2019, we show that women and candidates of color were seen as less electable than their white, male counterparts despite being preferred more frequently, holding policy stances and general election strategies constant. These effects were independent of respondents’ hostile sexism and racial resentment, and mediation analysis indicates that electability concerns reduced overall support for women and candidates of color. The results replicate and extend recent findings related to “strategic discrimination” in the US electorate.
2020年民主党初选中的战略歧视
初选选民经常支持他们认为比最能反映他们政策偏好的候选人更有机会赢得大选的候选人,这种看法被称为“可选举性”。虽然可选举性通常被认为意味着意识形态温和,最近的研究强调了候选人的人口特征可能会影响这种看法。2019年6月,我们对近3000名可能的民主党初选选民进行了一项联合实验,结果表明,尽管女性和有色人种候选人更受青睐,政策立场和大选策略不变,但她们的当选率低于白人和男性候选人。这些影响与受访者敌对的性别歧视和种族怨恨无关,调解分析表明,对可选举性的担忧降低了对女性和有色人种候选人的总体支持。这一结果复制并扩展了最近与美国选民“战略歧视”有关的研究结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
2.90%
发文量
51
期刊介绍: Published since 1937, Public Opinion Quarterly is among the most frequently cited journals of its kind. Such interdisciplinary leadership benefits academicians and all social science researchers by providing a trusted source for a wide range of high quality research. POQ selectively publishes important theoretical contributions to opinion and communication research, analyses of current public opinion, and investigations of methodological issues involved in survey validity—including questionnaire construction, interviewing and interviewers, sampling strategy, and mode of administration. The theoretical and methodological advances detailed in pages of POQ ensure its importance as a research resource.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信