iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Brendan Nyhan @brendannyhan.bsky.social · 02/10/2026

"tweets referencing divisive issues ... receive substantially greater engagement than tweets about the issues voters care most about" but "candidates predominantly discuss voter-relevant issues" abhinavramaswamy.com/main_(userEn...

12110

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Matt Graham @mattgraham.bsky.social · 31/08/2026

🚨NEW PAPER🚨 Covariate adjustment is a valuable tool for analyzing experiments but is vulnerable to abuse. We assess practice in political science and recommend some good practices. Coming soon to the Journal of Experimental Political Science. Preprint: osf.io/cdmsx_v1

03215

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Joel Sievert @jsievert.bsky.social · 29/08/2026

TTU Political Science is hosting the Texas American Behavior Conference November 13 & 14. If you are a graduate student or faculty member at a Texas university please consider submitting a proposal here: esrlttu.gov1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_... The submission deadline is September 1.

esrlttu.gov1.qualtrics.com

Qualtrics Survey | Qualtrics Experience Management

The most powerful, simple and trusted way to gather experience data. Start your journey to experience management and try a free account today.

025

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Ben Lyons @benlyons.bsky.social · 25/08/2026

New WP, would love feedback. Across datasets, age seems to be important to understanding support for violence & norm breaking more broadly. Antisocial traits (good predictors generally) are concentrated among younger adults & also more strongly associated w support among them osf.io/preprints/ps...

1106

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Neeraj Prasad @neerajprsd.bsky.social · 20/08/2026

My first piece as a Good Authority Fellow is out: "Good to Know: Why people support political violence." Thanks to @goodauth.bsky.social; and to @claryc.bsky.social and Vanessa Lide for substantive feedback and sharp editing. goodauthority.org/news/good-to-know-why-people-support-political-violence/

goodauthority.org

Good to Know: Why people support political violence

Political violence isn't a simple issue. Discover the surprising conditions under which people justify political violence, and why surveys often miss the mark.

066

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Public Opinion Quarterly - POQ @poqjournal.bsky.social · 19/08/2026

What motivates Americans' partisanship? In POQ, Fowler et al. find that values, ideology, and policy preferences are, by far, the most common reasons people give for their party identification and their affect toward the other party. Read now: doi.org/10.1093/poq/...

2119

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Brendan Nyhan @brendannyhan.bsky.social · 18/08/2026

We're hiring! Assistant Professor of Comparative Politics apply.interfolio.com/191508

24532

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Drew Engelhardt @amengel.bsky.social · 18/08/2026

Working on a dissertation in American political behavior and need money for survey research? Apply for a grant worth up to $15,000 from the Rapoport Family Foundation. They’re planning on awarding up to 15 grants this cycle. Deadline Oct. 21. www.rapoportfamilyfoundation.com/phdgrant

rapoportfamilyfoundation.com

Rapoport Doctoral Dissertation Grants

Supporting projects for PhD students doing political science research, democracy and social justice.

17790

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Kevin Collins @kwcollins.bsky.social · 14/08/2026

Another new, useful paper on the potential biasing effects of measuring attitudes pre-treatment in survey experiments, this one focused on racial attitudes. Finds no bias from pre-treatment measures in two of three racial attitude measurement strategies www.cambridge.org/core/journal...

0157

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Yamil Ricardo Velez @yamilrvelez.bsky.social · 13/08/2026

New paper with Alec Ewig, conditionally accepted at Political Analysis: Retrieval-Augmented Surveys. Most research evaluates the link between elected officials and citizens on highly salient policies. But what if concerns are systematically excluded from the agenda?

1137

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Jessie Sun @jessiesun.bsky.social · 13/08/2026

New paper on virtue trade-offs in everyday life, led by my PhD student, Qilin Zhang! A growing literature emphasizes trade-offs between competing moral principles (e.g., kindness vs. honesty), but are such trade-offs ubiquitous in everyday life? 1/5

Screenshot of abstract from PDF of an article titled "Virtue-Trade-Offs in Everyday Life".

1115

Reposted by Scott Clifford

John V. Kane @uptonorwell.bsky.social · 13/08/2026

🚨Super excited to share this new WP with Joohye Jeong, @adamberinsky.bsky.social, Soong & Parker. We ask a simple but extremely practical Q for survey researchers: 𝐃𝐨𝐞𝐬 𝐢𝐭 𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐰𝐞 𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐜𝐞 𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐦𝐬/𝐞𝐱𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐬𝐮𝐫𝐯𝐞𝐲? Answer: Not really, no. 👍

14219

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Alex Coppock @aecoppock.bsky.social · 12/08/2026

Northwestern is hiring in quant methods (assistant level, tenure track) Please repost and share with those you think would be good candidates, thank you! polisci.northwestern.edu/about/facult... #psjobs #psjminfo #poliscijobs

Assistant Professor of Quantitative Political Methodology (Tenure-Track)
The Department of Political Science at Northwestern University invites applications for a full-time position in Quantitative Political Methodology at the rank of Assistant Professor, tenure-track, to begin Fall 2027. We emphasize methodology with a strongly applied perspective: successful candidates will maintain an active, independent research program that includes methodological contributions in their own right, while also teaching quantitative research methods courses at the undergraduate and graduate levels and applying those methods to substantive questions in their area of expertise. We are especially interested in candidates whose work bridges data-driven/computational approaches with design-based inference, though we welcome applicants making cutting-edge contributions in either of these traditions or in other areas of political methodology. Successful candidates' substantive research agendas may be in any area of political science or may cross boundaries; as with all Northwestern faculty, successful candidates will be expected to provide service to the department, the university, and the profession.

Aerial photo of Northwestern's beautiful lakeside campus with political science's new building circled

04133

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Sean Ehrlich @seandehrlich.bsky.social · 11/08/2026

The ads are now up on APSA’s ejobs. One clarification: the American politics job is limited to behavior (broadly defined) while the Comparative job is, indeed, open to all substantive topics and any region. My DMs are open if you have any questions about either job, about FSU, or about Tallahassee.

042

Reposted by Scott Clifford

mark brandt @mjbsp.bsky.social · 10/08/2026

New pub, led by Aymin Triki & in collab w/ @abbycassario.bsky.social, accepted at JESP! We found similarities in party cues among the left and the right when using representative samples of issues, although right-wing authoritarians may be an exception Other interesting findings follow!

Abstract of paper. It reads, How do people with different political ideologies process political information? Party cues are an
effect where people are more likely to support a policy position if they learn their party also
supports it, shifting their judgement in accordance with cues from their inparty and against their
outparty. This effect has been at the center of the debate over the psychological differences
between liberals and conservatives, with some scholars suggesting that differences in cognitive
styles between liberals and conservatives (e.g., rigidity, cognitive reflection) should result in
differences in party cue susceptibility. We advance this debate by measuring rigid cognitive
styles and applying a stimuli sampling approach to party cues across four preregistered
experiments (N’s per study > 1200). We found convincing evidence for ideological symmetries
in party cues in quota matched samples of Americans (Studies 1 & 2). In Studies 3 and 4, across
four measures of ideology and three self-report measures of cognitive rigidity, we found
ideological differences in self-reported rigidity in line with previous research. In Study 3, a
convenience sample, we found that conservatives were more likely to follow party cues.
However, Study 4, using a quota matched sample, found no ideological differences in cue
susceptibility, except with respect to right-wing authoritarianism. Exploratory analyses found
that when one group has greater prior awareness or stronger initial views on a topic, they show
smaller cueing effects. We conclude that while liberals and conservatives differ in cognitive
style, they largely share similar cognitive processes for interpreting and integrating political
information.

12212

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Colin Carlson @colincarlson.bsky.social · 10/08/2026

I wrote about a reason not to use generative AI in your writing that I haven't seen anyone talking about. Once I realized this, banning GenAI in our lab's writing became a no-brainer. Feel free to share, I think this is probably useful especially for trainees: www.carlsonlab.bio/thoughts/the...

carlsonlab.bio

The only reason you’ll ever need not to write with AI — The Carlson Lab

Over the last year, our lab has been developing a policy on AI use. To do this, we did three main things: We read a lot of academic publications and tech news. We set up an #ai channel on our la...

351562633

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Drew Engelhardt @amengel.bsky.social · 27/07/2026

Out today a bit of a sampler of the argument from the book as applied to public responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Introduces some of the theorizing. doi.org/10.1111/pops...

5287

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Mohammad Atari @mohammadatari.bsky.social · 20/07/2026

New paper out today in Social and Personality Psychology Compass! What happens when our moral values come into conflict? Our new paper explores "metamorality": the second-order principles we use to navigate conflicting moral choices. W/ Jesse Graham

22111

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Will Allen @williamlallen.bsky.social · 17/07/2026

Which immigrants do people prefer and why? Many point to skill levels, but @mfreino.bsky.social @isabel-ruiz.bsky.social and I argue people also consider the social value of work immigrants do, even if considered "lower" skilled. Open access in @ejprjournal.bsky.social: doi.org/10.1017/S147... 🧵

Title: Beyond skills: How occupational essentiality and social value relate to attitudes toward immigrant labor.
Authors: William L. Allen, Mariña Fernández-Reino, and Isabel Ruiz
Abstract: Research on public attitudes toward immigration consistently shows that people prefer higher- over lower-skilled immigrants, largely for sociotropic economic and fiscal reasons. We argue that this account is incomplete: citizens also evaluate immigrant workers according to the essentiality and social value of the work they perform, alongside formal skills and education. We conceptualize two logics for evaluating occupations – economic-fiscal and moral-social – that shape attitudes toward labor immigrants, before testing this argument in two studies in the UK. Study 1 uses a preregistered conjoint survey experiment (N = 4,951) fielded during the UK’s third COVID-19 lockdown in January 2021. Respondents evaluated hypothetical labor immigrants varying in occupation, skill level, and origin. Immigrants working in occupations designated as ‘essential’ during the pandemic were substantially more likely to be preferred for admission (by about 22 percentage points) and more likely to be viewed as economically beneficial (by about 10 percentage points) than those in nonessential jobs, net of skill. Study 2 reports results from an online survey (N = 1,944) fielded in 2025 measuring perceptions of occupational essentiality, social value, economic value, prestige, skill, and labor shortages. Perceived essentiality is strongly associated with social value while remaining distinct from skill and prestige. Importantly, perceptions of occupational essentiality remained stable over time and correlated with preferences for admitting immigrants in those same occupations. Together, these findings highlight occupational essentiality as a distinct and consequential driver of immigration attitudes with implications for labor migration debates and policymaking.

24719

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Joshua Kertzer @jkertzer.bsky.social · 14/07/2026

We typically think of deterrence as cold and calculating. In a new JCR with @uoft-poli-sci.bsky.social's Pomeroy & Rathbun, we explore the psychology of deterrence thinking, showing it relies on intuition instead. When we shoot, we shoot from the hip. 🧵 journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...

1258

Reposted by Scott Clifford

American Political Science Review @apsrjournal.bsky.social · 14/07/2026

From our FirstView: New Evidence and Design Considerations for Repeated Measure Experiments in Survey Research by @dianamejordan.bsky.social, TRENT OLLERENSHAW and @atrexler.com. doi.org/10.1017/S000....

02616

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Yamil Ricardo Velez @yamilrvelez.bsky.social · 08/07/2026

I veer dangerously into normative territory in this piece: how new measures allow us to grapple with the messy, idiosyncratic preferences of Americans, what political specialization means for democracy, and why I’m doing this work in the first place.

substack.com

Mapping Islands of Opinion

The case for measuring, rather than assuming, what voters care about

43714

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Diego Reinero, Ph.D. @diegoreinero.bsky.social · 25/06/2026

🚨 New preprint out! 🚨 We’ve spent years assuming liberals and conservatives prioritize fundamentally different moral values—and designing persuasive messages based on that assumption. Our data suggest there's more to the story, and that making that assumption can backfire.

12811

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Adam Berinsky @adamberinsky.bsky.social · 29/06/2026

Boy this was a long road, but glad it's finally out! @dgrand.bsky.social @robbwiller.bsky.social @arechar.bsky.social (along with Michael N. Stagnaro, James N. Druckman, not tagable)

05524

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Linda Skitka @lindaskitka.bsky.social · 24/06/2026

Big takeaways: 1️⃣ Moralization is emotional, not rational — changing harm perceptions alone won't do it. 2️⃣ Moralized attitudes can shift, but need sustained, cumulative information. 3️⃣ Moral conviction is acquired more easily than it's lost. Full paper: tinyurl.com/cutbothways 8/8

tinyurl.com

Dropbox

396

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Linda Skitka @lindaskitka.bsky.social · 24/06/2026

🧵 New paper out in JPSP: Morality Cut Both Ways. Can reading facts make you moralize an issue — or lose a moral conviction? We ran 6 studies, 4,464 participants. The results were surprising. 👇 #MoralPsychology #Attitudes. @icedteas.bsky.social 1/8

24622

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Brendan Nyhan @brendannyhan.bsky.social · 22/06/2026

Yet again www.nber.org/papers/w3535...

38128

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Yamil Ricardo Velez @yamilrvelez.bsky.social · 17/06/2026

Why do arguments often change people’s beliefs without changing their attitudes? In a new APSR with @scottclifford.bsky.social and @patrickpliu.bsky.social, we point to belief relevance: arguments are more persuasive when they grapple with the idiosyncratic reasons people hold their political views.

49940

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Tobias Widmann @twidmann.bsky.social · 17/06/2026

📢 I’m hiring 2 three-year postdocs at Dept of Political Science, @au.dk! Come work with me on The Politics of Shaming and Shamelessness — a new project on elite rhetoric, emotions, norms, hostility and political violence. Deadline: 31 August 2026 Start: Dec 2026–Feb 2027 Please share widely! 🙏

international.au.dk

2 three-year postdocs in political communication and political psychology at Aarhus University - Vacancy at Aarhus University

Vacancy at Department of Political Science, Aarhus University

17975

Reposted by Scott Clifford

John Holbein @johnholbein1.bsky.social · 11/06/2026

Running an experiment to study racial discrimination? Going to use names to signal race? Here's a new tool! This helps you to choose the names you want to use based on: 1.) the strength of the racial signal you want to send 2.) whether you want to hold other factors (e.g., class) constant

17022

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Yusaku Horiuchi @yusakuhoriuchi.bsky.social · 09/06/2026

Please join us to hear about three exciting research projects by our fellows. It should be a wonderful session!

012

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Megan Zahneis @mzahneis.bsky.social · 03/06/2026

Half of surveyed Texas Tech faculty changed course content on their own after the chancellor's memos restricting teaching on race, gender, and sexuality. More than half say they're now looking for other jobs as a result of the memos. #HigherEd @chronicle.com www.chronicle.com/article/half...

chronicle.com

Half of Surveyed Faculty at Texas Tech Say They Altered Course Content Without Being Asked To

The findings of an unscientific, faculty-conducted survey suggested that new policies on teaching about race and sex have changed university instruction.

16138

Reposted by Scott Clifford

davidbroska.bsky.social @davidbroska.bsky.social · 28/05/2026

Americans say they want less inequality. Why don’t they support policies to reduce it? New paper: across 31 nationally representative survey waves (N=384,248) and a preregistered experiment (N=1,009), Americans favor PREdistributive over REdistributive policies 🧵 osf.io/preprints/so...

87228

Reposted by Scott Clifford

mark brandt @mjbsp.bsky.social · 28/05/2026

At Political Psychology (@ispp-pops.bsky.social), we typically publish empirical articles, but we do have other options! One exciting option are Dialogues, that put 2+ books in conversation with one another.

11911

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Jon Green @jongreen.bsky.social · 19/05/2026

new WP (w/ @ntd.bsky.social): we use the case of Christian nationalism to make a broader point about "niche ideologies" in mass opinion research, and why you shouldn't scale them the same way you'd scale more general attitudes Link: osf.io/wbdut/files/...

Title: Niche Ideologies in the Mass Public: The Case of
Christian Nationalism
Authors: Jon Green, Nick Davis
Abstract: It is common in survey research to measure political attitudes by inferring latent dimensions along which all respondents can be scored. We argue that this approach is ill-suited for the study of “niche ideologies” that organize the beliefs of concentrated minorities within specific political domains. We support this argument with the case of Christian nationalism, which is theorized as an ideology but typically measured as an attitude. Across two survey samples, we show that response patterns are better explained by a process in which individuals endorse, reject, or are unfamiliar with clusters of beliefs associated with Christian nationalism than by processes in which responses are dimensional. We then demonstrate that measuring Christian
nationalism as an attitude can distort its relationship with theoretically relevant policy preferences. Our results clarify distinctions between attitudes and ideologies and offer suggestions for how to investigate other niche ideologies in mass opinion research.

Figure 1. Distributions of Posterior Probabilities by DGP. Group-based is strongly preferred (higher probabilities for vast majority of respondents) in both BRS and PRRI samples.

Figure 3: Ideological identification by DGP. The Rejecter group is majority liberal across both samples with few conservatives; the Adherent group is majority conservative across both samples with few liberals.

Figure 6: Comparing group- versus dimensional-based estimates of the relationship between Christian nationalism and abortion attitudes (PRRI 2022). All models control for age, education, race, gender, party identification, and ideological identification.

When Christian nationalism is measured as a single dimension factor, it has positive relationships with both support for overturning Roe v. Wade and for more restrictive abortion policy. But when Christian nationalism is measured via a group-based mixture, being in the Adherent (vs. Innocent) group is only positively associated with more restrictive abortion policy, but not with support for overturning Roe v. Wade.

24926

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Yusaku Horiuchi @yusakuhoriuchi.bsky.social · 15/05/2026

Bluesky I made a public guide for preparing social science replication packages 📦 yhoriuchi.github.io/replication-... Please repost if this might help researchers preparing replication materials.

03010

Reposted by Scott Clifford

American Journal of Political Science (AJPS) @ajpseditor.bsky.social · 13/05/2026

AJPS Editors Blog Post: Pre-Analysis Plans (PAP) Policy Change. We recently clarified our policy regarding the execution of pre-analysis plans and the reporting of supplemental materials. These changes are in line with increasing transparency in reporting ajps.org/2026/05/13/p...

ajps.org

Pre-Analysis Plans (PAP) Policy Change

From: Dan Reiter and Adam Berinsky, Editors-in-Chief We recently clarified our policy regarding the execution of pre-analysis plans and the reporting of supplemental materials. These changes are in…

0127

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Yamil Ricardo Velez @yamilrvelez.bsky.social · 12/05/2026

Happy to share that my Cambridge Element with @patrickpliu.bsky.social, Tailored Experiments: Personalized Interventions Using Generative AI, has been accepted as part of Jamie Druckman’s Experimental Political Science series.

1275

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Joshua Kertzer @jkertzer.bsky.social · 04/05/2026

🚨 Now out in @bjpols.bsky.social w @busbyj2.bsky.social @jordantama.bsky.social @ckafura.bsky.social: Do American foreign policy elites know what the public wants? Partnering with @global-affairs.bsky.social, we show that elites systematically misread the room 🧵 www.cambridge.org/core/journal...

27728

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Peter Luca Versteegen @versteegenluca.bsky.social · 28/04/2026

🚨 Western democracies are often described as polarized. @katharinalawall.bsky.social, @mtsakiris.bsky.social + I study how polarization actually feels. Now published in @ejprjournal.bsky.social, we asked citizens in 5 European countries to report their emotions ⬇️ www.cambridge.org/core/journal...

14619

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Andrew Trexler @atrexler.com · 24/04/2026

Thrilled to announce my paper with @dianamejordan.bsky.social & sky-less Trent Ollerenshaw is now published open-access at @apsrjournal.bsky.social. In a (very) large replication & extension, we show that design effects of repeated measure experiments are nonzero but typically small. Thread:

Abstract for "New Evidence and Design Considerations for Repeated Measure Experiments in Survey Research" by Diana Jordan, Trent Ollerenshaw, and Andrew Trexler, published in the American Political Science Review. The abstract text reads: "We re-examine recent influential claims that repeated measure experimental designs offer large precision gains without biasing treatment effect estimates in survey research. We test these claims by experimentally varying the design of six classic political science experiments across three distinct large samples of U.S. adults (total N = 13,163). In contrast to prior evidence, we observe consistent attenuation of treatment effects in repeated measure designs. However, we show in simulations that this average design effect is small enough, and the precision gains large enough, that we recommend repeated measure designs for broad application—though (large-N) post-only designs may be preferable when research priorities include estimating the precise magnitude of a treatment effect. We additionally explore how several design considerations affect the bias-precision trade-off, such as within-subject versus between-groups designs, the relative separation of repeated measures within single surveys, and differences in respondent characteristics across sample types."

45228

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Brendan Nyhan @brendannyhan.bsky.social · 23/04/2026

Journal editors - the status quo on preregistration is not working! You need to check submissions vs. preregistrations before sending articles out for review. *56%* of experiments I reviewed in last year have severe problems with non-disclosure, undocumented deviations, & more - see Claude summary ↓

65613

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Timothy Ryan @tjryan02.bsky.social · 22/04/2026

🚨Job opportunity🚨 UNC Poli Sci is hiring a postdoc (one year renewable) to advance research on political behavior, with a special focus on free expression in higher education. Competitive salary and benefits. No teaching. Please encourage people to apply. Ad: timryan.web.unc.edu/wp-content/u...

timryan.web.unc.edu

01927

Reposted by Scott Clifford

John V. Kane @uptonorwell.bsky.social · 15/04/2026

🚨New working paper w/ the legendary @cbwlezien.bsky.social! Lots of talk about inflation & voters' political views. But how well do voters actually understand info about inflation? We find that most citizens conflate changes in rates w/ changes in prices. This has important consequences...

1199

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Cambridge University Press Political Science & IR @cambup-polsci.cambridge.org · 08/04/2026

CALL FOR EDITOR - Journal of Experimental Political Science (@jepsjournal.bsky.social) seeks an editor or editorial team from January 2027. Find out how to apply - cup.org/4ae3Tul cc @experimentsapsa.bsky.social Deadline for proposals - April 15, 2026.

037

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Talbot Andrews @talbotmandrews.bsky.social · 06/04/2026

Now more than ever we encounter each other's emotions about politics, on social media and in the news. When do we take strangers' emotional expression seriously, and when do we dismiss it as inappropriate or even insincere? You can find out now in our Cambridge Element!

nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com

Emotions on Our Screens

Cambridge Core - Politics: General Interest - Emotions on Our Screens

2148

Reposted by Scott Clifford

Nick Davis @ntd.bsky.social · 06/04/2026

a glimmer of glad tidings. my short book with @matthewhitt.bsky.social — Supremely Polarizing — is available FOR FREE. it nicely summarizes and extends our work on how partisanship shapes support for the Supreme Court. thank you for your attention to this matter.

cambridge.org

Supremely Polarizing

Cambridge Core - American Government, Politics and Policy - Supremely Polarizing

2258