iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Whether AI is ultimately used for good or ill largely depends on how govts, campaigns, and civil society orgs navigate this technological transformation. We hope our work spurs more innovation in building tools that expand access to democracy.

Last week, Science and Nature published two articles highlighting the potential for AI chatbots to persuade and manipulate voters. We take a different approach: using AI to make political information more accessible.

100

We discuss the potential for future interventions that might strengthen the alignment between issues and partisan affiliation.

110

Despite these knowledge gains, we observed little evidence of voters shifting toward the more proximate party, suggesting that issue proximity may not figure as prominently in the partisan attachments of young voters.

100

Across three experiments in the US, we found that VAA Bot enhanced knowledge of party stances on voters’ core issues by ~13 percentage points, with smaller spillovers on general issue knowledge (~4pp).

100

We designed a chatbot-based voting advice application – VAA Bot – to provide young voters with verified information drawn from party platforms and official sources.

100

Semra Sevi @semrasevi.bsky.social · 08/11/2025

🚨Excited to share our new paper published in PNAS (joint with @yamilrvelez.bsky.social and Don Green)! AI can enhance political knowledge and provide balanced information about politics with proper guardrails and vetted sources (e.g., party platforms). www.pnas.org/doi/full/10....

2358

It’s true, the paparazzi (aka my mom) won’t stop calling! 🥰

Semra Sevi @semrasevi.bsky.social · 08/11/2025

Quite a 24 hours in Canadian Politics, two Conservatives out (one to the Liberals, one gone altogether), a new Budget on the table, and my debut on Power & Politics! Nothing beats watching your research come to life. Full interview here: gem.cbc.ca/power-politics #cdnpoli

291

Reposted by Semra Sevi

Tommaso Pavone @tommasopavone.bsky.social · 15/10/2025

@utoronto.ca, do better! The Uni is excluding recent hires from cost-of-living adjustments that an arbitrator decided ALL faculty/librarians deserve. This harms junior colleagues struggling w/ inflation: we’ve organized a petition demanding @utoronto.ca change course. Spread the word! www.utfa.org

utfa.org

University of Toronto Faculty Association

The University of Toronto Faculty Association exists to protect and advance the well being of the faculty, librarians and research associates of the University of Toronto, the University of St. Michae...

121

Reposted by Semra Sevi

Inessa De Angelis @inessadeangelis.bsky.social · 04/09/2025

Which Canadian MPs are on Bluesky and what do they post? My new paper w/ @rohanalexander.bsky.social in @cjps-rcsp.bsky.social unpacks these questions, finding MPs use it like Twitter to discuss policy, the Ottawa bubble & constituency Read more: doi.org/10.1017/S000... #polsky #commsky #cdnpoli

What are Canadian Members of Parliament Doing on Bluesky? research note abstract

23212

Semra Sevi @semrasevi.bsky.social · 04/09/2025

Congrats! Can't wait to read this.

110

Semra Sevi @semrasevi.bsky.social · 16/08/2025

Very cool! Looking forward to read these. The last one is intriguing 😉

020

Semra Sevi @semrasevi.bsky.social · 16/08/2025

Thanks. Republicans appear more biased, but that doesn't mean they're more likely to hide it. We didn't measure overt bias.

020

Semra Sevi @semrasevi.bsky.social · 15/08/2025

Thanks! Would love to hear more about what you're doing with list experiments.

130

Semra Sevi @semrasevi.bsky.social · 10/08/2025

Congrats, Alex!! I’m so happy for you!

Political Science Research and Methods @psrm.bsky.social · 21/07/2025

Reposted by Semra Sevi

🪃Do legislators trade proposals? ➡️Leveraging a lottery in the Canadian Parliament, @semrasevi.bsky.social & D.P. Green find little evidence MPs second motions to gain favor. Support seems driven by shared interests, not quid pro quo www.cambridge.org/core/journal... #FirstView

063

Why is reciprocity so weak in 🇨🇦? Strong party discipline limits side deals even in the more flexible world of PMBs. Our study, using a rare real-world lottery, shows: Legislative support often reflects shared values, not traded favours. Not all politics is transactional.

So why second at all? ✅ Shared party ✅ Common values ✅ Constituency interests In other words: homophily, not horse-trading. Sometimes, MPs just support what they believe in, not because they expect payback.

110

Weak evidence for strategic seconding. MPs with better lottery spots are slightly more likely to second others, and there's almost no evidence that favours are returned in future parliaments.

100

We tested two things: 🔁 Do MPs second each other within the same parliament? 🔄 Do they return favors across different parliaments? The results?

100

After a PMB is introduced, MPs can formally second it to show support. If reciprocity exists, we’d expect MPs with good lottery spots to second others hoping to get support back when it’s their turn.

100

In Canada, MPs are randomly assigned a spot in a lottery that determines who can introduce a private member’s bill (PMB). This lets us test: · Who supports whom · Whether support gets repaid · If it’s loyalty, strategy or something else

100

🚨NEW PAPER: Do legislators trade favours? My latest with Donald Green uses a natural lottery in the Canadian Parliament to test whether MPs return favours when others support their proposals. Our findings may surprise you.👇 www.cambridge.org/core/journal...

140

The Incumbency Advantage in Canadian Elections | Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique | Cambridge Core

What changed? When party labels appeared on ballots, voters relied more on partisan cues than indiv. candidate familiarity. Result? The personal edge of incumbents disappeared. Party > Person. Link: www.cambridge.org/core/journal... @uoft.bsky.social

cambridge.org

The Incumbency Advantage in Canadian Elections

031

FINDING #2: Party matters more than person Incumbency advantage: Liberals pre-1972: +16 pts Conservatives pre-1972: +8 pts (not significant) Post-1972: Both parties? Advantage vanishes.

100

Using data from 1867 to 2021, and a RDD, I estimate the causal impact of incumbency on electoral success. FINDING #1: The incumbency advantage shrank dramatically. ✅ Before 1972: Incumbents had a 15-point edge. ❌ After 1972: Just 2 points, and no longer significant.

100

Before 1972, Canadian ballots showed only: • Candidate names • Occupations No party labels. No shortcuts for voters. Then came a 1970 law: Starting in 1972, ballots began listing party affiliations alongside candidate names.

100