Current Research Projects
Prosocial Politics: How Americans’ Desire to Help Shape Political Action
Summary Existing models of political behavior offer explanations for participation among individuals who are well resourced and stand to benefit or suffer from political changes. However, these models fail to explain high rates of political engagement among individuals who lack resources, or are not personally impacted by politics. What drives participation among such individuals? My dissertation / book project explores why and how people decide to engage in political action, with a specific focus on two questions (1) How do political forces shape our desire to help others? and (2) How does the desire to help others in turn facilitate political participation? To answer these questions, I offer a new theory called prosocial politics. In this model, citizens’ participation in politics is driven by how much they see helping others as a political value, or their prosocial political preferences. The influence of this value is particularly strengthened by clarity around which groups are in need, and which groups are in power. Prosocial politics theory argues that when citizens encounter a political situation, they appraise three main factors (1) whether helping others through politics matters to them (2) whether a group is in need (3) whether to take political action to help that group.
In three large national surveys with a total of 5,465 respondents, I find strong correlations between prosocial political preferences and greater intentions to participate in politics. To explore how politics shapes the types of groups Americans want to help through politics, I also contribute a novel open-ended instrument to capture the diversity in the public’s stratification beliefs: the Circles of Power and Need measure. With results from this measure, I use text-as-data methods to uncover how Americans differentially conceptualize hierarchy. Building on these finalized studies, the project also features experimental evidence which showcases how Americans are more or less mobilized to act politically when groups seeking support align with stratification patterns commonly associated with their in-party.
art by Alex Galván
The Politics of Anti-Blackness Among U.S. Latinos *
Pelo Malo (2013)
Co-Authored with Franshelly Martinez-Ortiz
Abstract Our understanding of how Latines in the United States fit into the political landscape typically misses the nuanced relationship Latines have with their own racialization in society, and its consequences for American democracy. In this project, we seek to clarify how anti-blackness among Latines influences policy preferences and political attitudes. We theorize that Latines are likely to show inherent biases against Blackness–despite their political identification with more liberal policies, or their identification with the Democratic party. In other words, we expect that anti-blackness is not just a marker of Latines who prefer conservative policies, or the Republican party. Instead, anti-blackness among Latines also represents a deep desire to escape the treatment Black people experience in the United States by transcending “race” as a factor that shapes their assimilation. Using a survey experiment, we propose testing how increasing the salience of skin-tone and its role in shaping opportunities in the U.S. affects how Latines express political priorities, discuss social stratification, and support or oppose reparations.
Popular Problems: Measuring Opposition to Wealth Defense
Co-Authored with Amir Fleischmann
Abstract An increasing body of academic research identifies the United States as an oligarchy. The rise of oligarchy in the United States is facilitated by “wealth defense”: a set of strategies used by oligarchs to maintain control over their fortunes and incomes (Winters, 2011). Despite the centrality of wealth defense policies to sustaining oligarchy in the United States, public opinion research has yet to explore how Americans support or oppose these practices. Instead, previous research has either focused on downward redistributive attitudes (Bartels, 2005; McCall, 2013; Cavaillé, 2023), social comparison vantage points (Condon, Wichowsky), affective sentiments (Piston, 2018), media framing (Culpepper and Lee, 2022), or specific policies put to voters in state ballot initiatives (Franko et al, 2013; Newman and Teten, 2021; Tolbert et al, 2019). How does the public support or oppose the actual policies (such as tax havens, loopholes, less tax brackets) which entrench global inequality? We answer this question with evidence from a national online survey conducted in March of 2024 (n=1,200). We investigate opposition to wealth defense using nine novel policy items, and test the mechanisms which drive opposition to wealth defense with common empirical predictors. Overall, we find broad support for policies which eliminate tax avoidance among the rich and increase tax burdens on the ultra wealthy (e.g. creating new tax brackets, taxing the rich at higher rates). Although opposition to wealth defense is higher among liberals and Democrats, there is consistent bipartisan agreement on a number of policies, like creating new tax brackets, and closing tax loopholes.