Research
Dissertation
Thousands of Small Battles: A Case Study on the Impact of Political Discussion Networks on Vote Choice in Caucuses
Link to dissertation page at the University of Nebraska
How do the people with whom we talk about politics influence our voting behavior? In this dissertation, I seek to answer that question within the particular context of voters in a single Iowa county in the 2016 Republican presidential caucus. In doing so, I seek to refine generalizations about the influence of political discussion networks on voting behavior, mainly developed to explain behavior in general elections, to nomination contests, a comparatively underdeveloped area of inquiry. This study also contributes to a greater understanding of the behavior of Iowa caucus attendees, an understudied area despite Iowa’s importance (along with New Hampshire) in our sequential presidential nominating system. Through a series of panel interviews supported by observations, I make several findings affirming theories on social influences on voting behavior within the context of nomination contests. The first is that individuals are reasonably accurate when predicting which candidate a political discussion partner supports despite the multi-candidate nature of the nomination contest and not having party ID as a frame of reference. Second, although there is some evidence for campaign effects in the form of contacts from campaigns or supporters of candidates, political discussion networks have a stronger influence on vote choice in nomination contests than do campaign effects. I note a tendency towards increased homophily on candidate preference over the course of a campaign. A unique finding of this study that homophily within a group may trigger strategic voting behavior, in the form of supporting the main rival of the leading candidate within a political discussion network, as well as bandwagoning. Finally, an emergent study of local political elites finds variation between local elected officials, party leaders, and party activists in terms of ideology and the size of political discussion networks. Those findings suggest that local party leaders may play a more important role than local elected officials in diffusing political information in their communities during nomination contests. I conclude with recommendations for further research.
Committee: Elizabeth Theiss-Morse (chair), Dona-Gene Barton, John Hibbing, Alice Kang, Ronald Lee (Communication Studies)
Thousands of Small Battles: A Case Study on the Impact of Political Discussion Networks on Vote Choice in Caucuses
Link to dissertation page at the University of Nebraska
How do the people with whom we talk about politics influence our voting behavior? In this dissertation, I seek to answer that question within the particular context of voters in a single Iowa county in the 2016 Republican presidential caucus. In doing so, I seek to refine generalizations about the influence of political discussion networks on voting behavior, mainly developed to explain behavior in general elections, to nomination contests, a comparatively underdeveloped area of inquiry. This study also contributes to a greater understanding of the behavior of Iowa caucus attendees, an understudied area despite Iowa’s importance (along with New Hampshire) in our sequential presidential nominating system. Through a series of panel interviews supported by observations, I make several findings affirming theories on social influences on voting behavior within the context of nomination contests. The first is that individuals are reasonably accurate when predicting which candidate a political discussion partner supports despite the multi-candidate nature of the nomination contest and not having party ID as a frame of reference. Second, although there is some evidence for campaign effects in the form of contacts from campaigns or supporters of candidates, political discussion networks have a stronger influence on vote choice in nomination contests than do campaign effects. I note a tendency towards increased homophily on candidate preference over the course of a campaign. A unique finding of this study that homophily within a group may trigger strategic voting behavior, in the form of supporting the main rival of the leading candidate within a political discussion network, as well as bandwagoning. Finally, an emergent study of local political elites finds variation between local elected officials, party leaders, and party activists in terms of ideology and the size of political discussion networks. Those findings suggest that local party leaders may play a more important role than local elected officials in diffusing political information in their communities during nomination contests. I conclude with recommendations for further research.
Committee: Elizabeth Theiss-Morse (chair), Dona-Gene Barton, John Hibbing, Alice Kang, Ronald Lee (Communication Studies)
Under Review
Deferring to the Specialists: Perceptions of Interest Group Legitimacy and Expertise as Source Cues in Down-ballot Statewide Races
Candidates for down-ballot statewide offices (below the lieutenant governor level) do not have the resources to effectively reach voters, making their candidacies move with the tide of external forces. In such cases, the support of interest groups, especially those seen to be honest brokers and expert information providers, may play an important role in influencing voting behavior by acting as source cues for voters. Using an experimental design, I expose a sample of participants to equivalent ads that vary only by the “paid for by” disclaimer at the end of the ad. After exposure to each ad, participants were asked questions to measure the persuasiveness of the ad and the credibility of the sponsor. The results of the experiment support the contention that the perceived expertise of the interest group to evaluate candidates acts as a persuasive source cue independent of the perceived neutrality of the interest group.
Deferring to the Specialists: Perceptions of Interest Group Legitimacy and Expertise as Source Cues in Down-ballot Statewide Races
Candidates for down-ballot statewide offices (below the lieutenant governor level) do not have the resources to effectively reach voters, making their candidacies move with the tide of external forces. In such cases, the support of interest groups, especially those seen to be honest brokers and expert information providers, may play an important role in influencing voting behavior by acting as source cues for voters. Using an experimental design, I expose a sample of participants to equivalent ads that vary only by the “paid for by” disclaimer at the end of the ad. After exposure to each ad, participants were asked questions to measure the persuasiveness of the ad and the credibility of the sponsor. The results of the experiment support the contention that the perceived expertise of the interest group to evaluate candidates acts as a persuasive source cue independent of the perceived neutrality of the interest group.
Working Papers
What Happens When Money Doesn’t Matter? Predictors of Vote Share beyond “Partisan Tides" in Statewide Down-ballot Races
While party ID is the single most important cue in campaigns marked by low information, support by interest groups has also been demonstrated to be a potential source of voting cues for both interest group members and those outside the group. Other potential sources of cues for voters include campaign communications, candidate gender, and incumbency. However, races for North Carolina Council of State positions are such low-profile affairs that few voters know much about the candidates. Furthermore, the amount of money most campaigns spend in those races is insufficient to have much of an impact. This article argues that the support of interest groups will have an enlarged impact on election results for those offices. This study analyzes that hypothesis in terms of elections for eight North Carolina Council of State offices between 2000 and 2016. It finds that the support of interest groups has as large an impact on election outcomes as incumbency and a greater impact than money spent by campaigns, candidate gender, or coattails from candidates higher on the ballot.
The Impact of Social Contexts on Political Activism: A Case Study of Local Political Elites in Iowa
This report presents the findings of qualitative case study of local Republican political elites in Fremont County, Iowa embedded in a larger study related to the 2016 Iowa presidential caucus. The main findings of this case study are there are three distinct social contexts among local political elites: Republican Party central committee core members, central committee peripheral members, and local elected officials. The political elites differ in their expressed ideology, with central committee peripheral members expressing the strongest views in favor of a strong and consistent conservative ideology and elected officials expressing the greatest belief in the need for moderation. Central committee core members exhibited a greater belief in the efficacy of political discussion and more interest in politics, a finding supported by evidence that they had larger political discussion networks than other political elites. These findings suggest that greater emphasis should be paid to the social contexts of party activists, rather than the influence of the party organizations, when investigating how local political elites influence electoral campaigns.
What Happens When Money Doesn’t Matter? Predictors of Vote Share beyond “Partisan Tides" in Statewide Down-ballot Races
While party ID is the single most important cue in campaigns marked by low information, support by interest groups has also been demonstrated to be a potential source of voting cues for both interest group members and those outside the group. Other potential sources of cues for voters include campaign communications, candidate gender, and incumbency. However, races for North Carolina Council of State positions are such low-profile affairs that few voters know much about the candidates. Furthermore, the amount of money most campaigns spend in those races is insufficient to have much of an impact. This article argues that the support of interest groups will have an enlarged impact on election results for those offices. This study analyzes that hypothesis in terms of elections for eight North Carolina Council of State offices between 2000 and 2016. It finds that the support of interest groups has as large an impact on election outcomes as incumbency and a greater impact than money spent by campaigns, candidate gender, or coattails from candidates higher on the ballot.
The Impact of Social Contexts on Political Activism: A Case Study of Local Political Elites in Iowa
This report presents the findings of qualitative case study of local Republican political elites in Fremont County, Iowa embedded in a larger study related to the 2016 Iowa presidential caucus. The main findings of this case study are there are three distinct social contexts among local political elites: Republican Party central committee core members, central committee peripheral members, and local elected officials. The political elites differ in their expressed ideology, with central committee peripheral members expressing the strongest views in favor of a strong and consistent conservative ideology and elected officials expressing the greatest belief in the need for moderation. Central committee core members exhibited a greater belief in the efficacy of political discussion and more interest in politics, a finding supported by evidence that they had larger political discussion networks than other political elites. These findings suggest that greater emphasis should be paid to the social contexts of party activists, rather than the influence of the party organizations, when investigating how local political elites influence electoral campaigns.
Conference Participation and Training
- Presenter, Predicting Without the Party ID Net: The Accuracy of Predictions of Discussion Partners’ Candidate Preference in a Presidential Nominating Contest, North Carolina Political Science Association conference, Raleigh, NC, 2/2018
- Poster Presenter, Networks of Political Subspecies, Political Networks Conference, Columbus, OH 6/2017
- Training, Introduction to Network Analysis and Advanced Network Analysis, Interuniversity Consortium for Political and Social Research Summer Program, 6/2016
- Presenter, Deferring to the Experts: Endorsements as Source Cues in Down-Ballot Statewide Races; North Carolina Political Science Association conference, Research Triangle Park, NC, 2/2016
- Presenter, The Impact of Social Contexts on Political Activism: A Case Study of Local Political Elites in Iowa, Iowa Conference on Presidential Politics, Sioux Center, IA, 10/2015
- Poster Presenter, What Happens When Money Doesn’t Matter?, Midwest Political Science Association conference, Chicago, IL, 4/2014
- Presenter, Endorsements in Down-Ballot Races in North Carolina; Panel Chair, Nonprofit Organizations and Volunteers, North Carolina Political Science Association Conference, Cary, NC, 2/2014
- Panel Chair, Elections in North Carolina and Beyond, North Carolina Political Science Association Conference, Raleigh, NC, 2/2013
- Participant, American Political Science Association Teaching and Learning Conference, General Education/Core Curriculum track, Charlotte, NC, 2/2007
Awards and Fellowships
- 2017 Thomas W. Smith Fellowship, $5,000
- Interuniversity Consortium for Political and Social Research Summer Program grant, IHS, $4,150, 2016
- 2016 Michael and Andrea Leven Family Foundation Fellowship, $5,000
- North Carolina Political Science Association, Fidelity Investments Award for the best conference paper by a graduate student, 2016 (awarded in 2017)
- McPhee Fellowship for Dissertation Research, UNL Department of Political Science, $2,000, 2015
- Institute for Humane Studies PhD scholarship, $1,500, 2015
- UNL Department of Political Science travel grants, $200, 2014, 2015, 2016
Link to YouTube Channel
My channel (so far) only has videos related to my research.
My channel (so far) only has videos related to my research.