D P Christenson
Biographic Data
| ID | 78067 |
|---|---|
| NAME | D P Christenson |
| GIVEN NAMES | D P |
| FAMILY NAME | Christenson |
| SIGNATURE | CHRISTENSON D P |
| AFFILIATIONS | Boston University |
| ORCID | 0000-0003-4072-5391 |
| VERIFIED | Yes |
| TOTAL WORKS | 39 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 675 |
| AUTHOR COUNT | 39 |
| EDITOR COUNT | 0 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2007 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2026 |
| H-INDEX | 14 |
Polling Across Borders: The Promise and Pitfalls of Convenience Samples in a Cross-National Context
This study evaluates the performance of two widely used survey platforms, Lucid and Morning Consult, across six diverse national contexts: Brazil, India, Japan, Nigeria, the Philippines, and the United States. We assess the impact of platform choice on sample composition, response quality, political judgments, and treatment effect estimation, focusing on a randomized corruption treatment embedded within the survey. Attention filter passage rates …
Supply-Side Dynamics of the US Supreme Court Docket: The Spatial-Temporal Landscape of Writ of Cert Petitions
Existing scholarship on US Supreme Court certiorari has largely centered on the demand side, prioritizing the internal motivations of justices. This approach often overlooks the broader supply-side perspective—the nature and evolution of the complete pool of petitions. This study addresses this gap by analyzing the universe of writs of certiorari from 1946 to 2019. Coding for petition date and origin, petitioner identity, and disposition, we trac…
Cutting in Line: How Powerful Organized Interests Hasten & Delay Executive Branch Nominations
Despite the potential to shape policy in every domain of government, organized interests have not been central to discussions of the nomination process for bureaucratic appointments. We test measures of the quantity of interest group opposition and support for nominees as well as the power of groups on nomination outcomes and duration. Using an original data set of interest involvement in nominations from the 106th to 115th Congresses, we find th…
The Downstream Effects of Certiorari: Agenda-Setting, Amicus Briefs, and Opinion Writing on the US Supreme Court
The majority opinion of the Supreme Court establishes precedent, but separate opinion writing affords the justices the ability to expound upon it or express their disagreement with the ruling or its logic. We broaden the exploration of separate opinion writing to consider how decisions and case features at the moment of granting cert shape justices’ decisions to engage in nonconsensual behavior. We also sharpen the focus on external actors to con…
Rising seas, rising concerns: How Climate Change Vulnerability Shapes Opinions Towards Policy
Public opinion towards human-induced climate change is polarized along partisan lines. Indeed, scholars debate whether direct experiences with the consequences of climate change result in durable effects on opinions or behaviors. Our analysis of hundreds of thousands of survey respondents and nearly 30,000 precinct-level voting returns challenges this emerging consensus for one kind of climate change outcome: rising sea levels. We find that persi…
U.S. immigration policy at the court: Organized interests & asymmetric decisions
Do some interest groups fare better on immigration cases before the Supreme Court? We build on interest group power theory and extend the literature by focusing on the heterogeneity of signers to amicus curiae briefs. Specifically, we argue that the presence of organizations that collaborate with multiple communities sends stronger signals to the justices. We use network community detection methods to reveal the coalition behavior of amici that f…
Conglomerates at the court: The political consequences of mergers & acquisitions
Increasingly, corporations expand through the creation or acquisition of new subsidiary companies. Despite the commonality of the practice, little is known regarding how it influences corporations’ political behavior. This research note analyzes how subsidiaries shape corporations’ political interests and collaborations as they seek to influence the Supreme Court. To accomplish this, we construct a historical dataset of the acquisitions and merge…
The Ideologies of Organized Interests and Amicus Curiae Briefs: Large-Scale, Social Network Imputation of Ideal Points
Interest group ideology is theoretically and empirically critical in the study of American politics, yet our measurement of this key concept is lacking both in scope and time. By leveraging network science and ideal point estimation, we provide a novel measure of ideology for amicus curiae briefs and organized interests with accompanying uncertainty estimates. Our Amicus Curiae Network scores cover more than 12,000 unique groups and more than 11,…
Ask Only What Your Country Can Do for You: Group Interests, Constituency Characteristics and Demands for Representation
Providing representation entails making choices about prioritizing the needs of diverse groups within one’s constituency. While citizens cannot reasonably expect that representatives will cater to their particular interests or priorities all the time, we know little about citizens’ expectations in this regard. In this paper, we present the results of two survey experiments that probe the relationship between citizens’ group identifications, their…
The Primary Rules: Parties, Voters, and Presidential Nominations
In 1968, Hubert Humphrey, the sitting vice president, was nominated as the presidential candidate for the Democratic Party without campaigning in a single primary. Fast-forward to 2016, when Donald Trump, a clear party outsider, emerged as the winner of the Republican nomination, despite the preferences of many, if not most, Republican elites. How could it be that we have gone from a nominating system of party elite control to one in which a dist…
Recruiting large online samples in the United States and India: Facebook, Mechanical Turk, and Qualtrics
This article examines online recruitment via Facebook, Mechanical Turk (MTurk), and Qualtrics panels in India and the United States. It compares over 7300 respondents—1000 or more from each source and country—to nationally representative benchmarks in terms of demographics, political attitudes and knowledge, cooperation, and experimental replication. In the United States, MTurk offers the cheapest and fastest recruitment, Qualtrics is most demogr…
The Coup de Grâce to the Sanders Campaign: Michigan, Momentum & Viability
The Myth of the Imperial Presidency: How Public Opinion Checks the Unilateral Executive
Reassessing the Supreme Court: How Decisions and Negativity Bias Affect Legitimacy
While the Supreme Court’s legitimacy is generally considered essential to its influence, scholars continue to debate whether the Court’s decisions affect individuals’ assessments of it. The last week of the 2013 term provides an unusual opportunity to evaluate these issues because the Court made a conservative decision concerning the Voting Rights Act (VRA) only one day before it made a liberal one about same-sex marriage. We use original panel d…
Cue‐Taking in Congress: Interest Group Signals from Dear Colleague Letters
Why do some pieces of legislation move forward while others languish? We address this fundamental question by examining the role of interest groups in Congress, specifically the effect of their legislative endorsements in Dear Colleague letters. These letters provide insights into the information that members use to both influence and make policy decisions. We demonstrate that endorsements from particularly well‐connected interest groups are a st…
Bad characters or just more polarization? The rise of extremely negative feelings for presidential candidates
Does Public Opinion Constrain Presidential Unilateralism
Whether presidential unilateralism is normatively advantageous or parlous for American democracy may depend on the extent to which a check remains on its exercise and abuse. Because the formal institutional constraints on unilateral action are weak, an emerging literature argues that the most important checks on unilateralism may be political, with public opinion playing a pivotal role. However, existing scholarship offers little systematic evide…
Substantive implications of unobserved heterogeneity: Testing the frailty approach to exponential random graph models
Modeling Unobserved Heterogeneity in Social Networks with the Frailty Exponential Random Graph Model
In the study of social processes, the presence of unobserved heterogeneity is a regular concern. It should be particularly worrisome for the statistical analysis of networks, given the complex dependencies that shape network formation combined with the restrictive assumptions of related models. In this paper, we demonstrate the importance of explicitly accounting for unobserved heterogeneity in exponential random graph models (ERGM) with a Monte …
Role analysis using the ego-ERGM: A look at environmental interest group coalitions
The Specter of Supreme Court Criticism: Public Opinion and Unilateral Action
The conventional wisdom suggests that the judicial constraint on presidential unilateralism is weak: judicial challenges are rare and successful ones rarer still. However, we argue that courts have grown increasingly assertive in checking important unilateral policy initiatives in both the foreign and domestic arenas. This judicial reassertion also raises the prospect that courts may exert a more informal constraint on presidential power. Utilizi…
Who Votes for the Future? Information, Expectations, and Endogeneity in Economic Voting
All the President's Senators: Presidential Copartisans and the Allocation of Federal Grants
Previous scholarship argues that House members' partisan relationship to the president is among the most important determinants of the share of federal dollars they bring home to their constituents. Do presidential politics also shape distributive outcomes in the Senate? Analyzing the allocation of more than $8.5 trillion of federal grants across the states from 1984 to 2008, we show that presidential copartisan senators are more successful than …
Mobilizing the Public Against the President: Congress and the Political Costs of Unilateral Action
Prior scholarship overlooks the capacity of other actors to raise the political costs of unilateral action by turning public opinion against the president. Through a series of five experiments embedded in nationally representative surveys, we demonstrate Congress's ability to erode support for unilateral actions by raising both constitutional and policy‐based objections to the exercise of unilateral power. Congressional challenges to the unilater…
Constitutional Qualms or Politics as Usual? The Factors Shaping Public Support for Unilateral Action
The formal institutional constraints that Congress and the courts impose on presidential unilateral action are feeble. As a result, recent scholarship suggests that public opinion may be the strongest check against executive overreach. However, little is known about how the public assesses unilateral action. Through a series of five survey experiments embedded in nationally representative surveys, we examine the extent to which Americans evaluate…
Recruiting large online samples in the United States and India: Facebook, Mechanical Turk, and Qualtrics
This article examines online recruitment via Facebook, Mechanical Turk (MTurk), and Qualtrics panels in India and the United States. It compares over 7300 respondents—1000 or more from each source and country—to nationally representative benchmarks in terms of demographics, political attitudes and knowledge, cooperation, and experimental replication. In the United States, MTurk offers the cheapest and fastest recruitment, Qualtrics is most demogr…
Chief Justice Roberts's Health Care Decision Disrobed: The Microfoundations of the Supreme Court's Legitimacy
The 2012 challenge to the Affordable Care Act was an unusual opportunity for people to form or reassess opinions about the Supreme Court. We utilize panel data coupled with as-if random assignment to reports that Chief Justice Roberts's decision was politically motivated to investigate the microfoundations of the Court's legitimacy. Specifically, we test the effects of changes in individuals' ideological congruence with the Court and exposure to …
Quality Over Quantity: Amici Influence and Judicial Decision Making
Interest groups often make their preferences known on cases before the U.S. Supreme Court via amicus curiae briefs. In evaluating the case and related arguments, we posit that judges take into account more than just the number of supporters for the liberal and conservative positions. Specifically, judges' decisions may also reflect the relative power of the groups. We use network position to measure interest group power in U.S. Supreme Court case…
Constitutional Qualms or Politics as Usual? The Factors Shaping Public Support for Unilateral Action
The formal institutional constraints that Congress and the courts impose on presidential unilateral action are feeble. As a result, recent scholarship suggests that public opinion may be the strongest check against executive overreach. However, little is known about how the public assesses unilateral action. Through a series of five survey experiments embedded in nationally representative surveys, we examine the extent to which Americans evaluate…
Reassessing the Supreme Court: How Decisions and Negativity Bias Affect Legitimacy
While the Supreme Court’s legitimacy is generally considered essential to its influence, scholars continue to debate whether the Court’s decisions affect individuals’ assessments of it. The last week of the 2013 term provides an unusual opportunity to evaluate these issues because the Court made a conservative decision concerning the Voting Rights Act (VRA) only one day before it made a liberal one about same-sex marriage. We use original panel d…
Cue‐Taking in Congress: Interest Group Signals from Dear Colleague Letters
Why do some pieces of legislation move forward while others languish? We address this fundamental question by examining the role of interest groups in Congress, specifically the effect of their legislative endorsements in Dear Colleague letters. These letters provide insights into the information that members use to both influence and make policy decisions. We demonstrate that endorsements from particularly well‐connected interest groups are a st…
Mobilizing the Public Against the President: Congress and the Political Costs of Unilateral Action
Prior scholarship overlooks the capacity of other actors to raise the political costs of unilateral action by turning public opinion against the president. Through a series of five experiments embedded in nationally representative surveys, we demonstrate Congress's ability to erode support for unilateral actions by raising both constitutional and policy‐based objections to the exercise of unilateral power. Congressional challenges to the unilater…
Does Public Opinion Constrain Presidential Unilateralism
Whether presidential unilateralism is normatively advantageous or parlous for American democracy may depend on the extent to which a check remains on its exercise and abuse. Because the formal institutional constraints on unilateral action are weak, an emerging literature argues that the most important checks on unilateralism may be political, with public opinion playing a pivotal role. However, existing scholarship offers little systematic evide…
Who Votes for the Future? Information, Expectations, and Endogeneity in Economic Voting
Issue-Specific Opinion Change: The Supreme Court and Health Care Reform
Did the Supreme Court decision in the Affordable Care Act case change public opinion about health care reform? Utilizing a multi-wave panel design with observations collected just hours before and after the Court's decision, this study addresses macro-level questions concerning the Court's effect on opinion about health care reform generally and the individual mandate specifically. Findings show that support for health care reform remained consta…
Modeling Unobserved Heterogeneity in Social Networks with the Frailty Exponential Random Graph Model
In the study of social processes, the presence of unobserved heterogeneity is a regular concern. It should be particularly worrisome for the statistical analysis of networks, given the complex dependencies that shape network formation combined with the restrictive assumptions of related models. In this paper, we demonstrate the importance of explicitly accounting for unobserved heterogeneity in exponential random graph models (ERGM) with a Monte …
Bad characters or just more polarization? The rise of extremely negative feelings for presidential candidates
Changing Horses in Wartime? The 2004 Presidential Election
Comparing membership interest group networks across space and time, size, issue and industry
We compare and contrast the network formation of interest groups across industry and issue area. We focus on membership interest groups, which by virtue of representing the interests of voluntary members face particular organizational and maintenance constraints. To reveal their cooperative behavior we build a network dataset based on cosigner status to United States Supreme Court amicus curiae briefs and analyze it with exponential random graph …
Deus ex Machina: Candidate Web Presence and the Presidential Nomination Campaign
Using data from the 2008 presidential nomination contest, we offer systematic tests of the relationships between traditional campaign factors, the Internet and campaign performance. We find that claims of the Internet’s relevance to modern campaigns are warranted, as it is a unique facet of campaigns and significantly improves candidates’ financial and electoral support. The Internet is especially helpful to candidates in generating small-donor c…
Role analysis using the ego-ERGM: A look at environmental interest group coalitions
The Ideologies of Organized Interests and Amicus Curiae Briefs: Large-Scale, Social Network Imputation of Ideal Points
Interest group ideology is theoretically and empirically critical in the study of American politics, yet our measurement of this key concept is lacking both in scope and time. By leveraging network science and ideal point estimation, we provide a novel measure of ideology for amicus curiae briefs and organized interests with accompanying uncertainty estimates. Our Amicus Curiae Network scores cover more than 12,000 unique groups and more than 11,…
All the President's Senators: Presidential Copartisans and the Allocation of Federal Grants
Previous scholarship argues that House members' partisan relationship to the president is among the most important determinants of the share of federal dollars they bring home to their constituents. Do presidential politics also shape distributive outcomes in the Senate? Analyzing the allocation of more than $8.5 trillion of federal grants across the states from 1984 to 2008, we show that presidential copartisan senators are more successful than …
Following the Money: Super PACs and the 2012 Presidential Nomination
The entrance of Super Political Action Committees (Super PACs ), outside groups with no caps on fundraising or independent expenditures, prompts a reexamination of the role of money in campaigns and elections. We investigate the influence of Super PAC expenditures in the 2012 Republican nomination contest. A compressed calendar makes nomination campaigns expensive and money crucial, especially for lesser‐known candidates, such that outside expend…
Mass Preferences on Shared Representation and the Composition of Legislative Districts
Scholars of redistricting often discuss “communities of interest” as a guideline for drawing districts, but scholarship offers little guidance on how citizens construe communities and interests in the context of representation. In this article, we seek to better understand how citizens’ perceptions of people and places affect preferences regarding representation. Using an original survey conducted in 15 Massachusetts communities, we explore wheth…
Polls and Elections: Still Part of the Conversation: Iowa and New Hampshire's Say within the Invisible Primary
We propose that the extant literature has underestimated the central roles of Iowa and New Hampshire within the invisible primary and, thus, party nominations. Since candidates and the news media focus disproportionately on these states early in the nomination season, impressions of candidate performance within these states have a disproportionate influence on the invisible primary long before their actual outcomes are observed. Using a Bayesian …
More Bang for the Buck: Campaign Spending and Fundraising Success
Can candidates spend their way into financial success? We propose that the 2007 presidential money primary offers unprecedented leverage to evaluate spending’s influence since it allows for sharper controls of confounding factors. Our results demonstrate that greater candidate spending on fundraising-related efforts is associated with significant future financial benefits. We estimate that, prior to the primaries, increases in spending have an eq…
Riding the Waves of Money: Contribution Dynamics in the 2008 Presidential Nomination Campaign
The 2008 primary was the most nuanced and expensive nomination contest in history. We investigate how this massive battle for contributions played out over 2007 and the first half of 2008 by analyzing the daily dynamics of candidate contributions using the Federal Elections Commission's collection of individual contributions. Not surprisingly, Giuliani and Clinton were the leaders in contribution momentum during the latter parts of the so-called …
Substantive implications of unobserved heterogeneity: Testing the frailty approach to exponential random graph models
The Specter of Supreme Court Criticism: Public Opinion and Unilateral Action
The conventional wisdom suggests that the judicial constraint on presidential unilateralism is weak: judicial challenges are rare and successful ones rarer still. However, we argue that courts have grown increasingly assertive in checking important unilateral policy initiatives in both the foreign and domestic arenas. This judicial reassertion also raises the prospect that courts may exert a more informal constraint on presidential power. Utilizi…
Changing Horses in Wartime? The 2004 Presidential Election
Riding the Waves of Money: Contribution Dynamics in the 2008 Presidential Nomination Campaign
The 2008 primary was the most nuanced and expensive nomination contest in history. We investigate how this massive battle for contributions played out over 2007 and the first half of 2008 by analyzing the daily dynamics of candidate contributions using the Federal Elections Commission's collection of individual contributions. Not surprisingly, Giuliani and Clinton were the leaders in contribution momentum during the latter parts of the so-called …
The evolution and formation of amicus curiae networks
Polls and Elections: Still Part of the Conversation: Iowa and New Hampshire's Say within the Invisible Primary
We propose that the extant literature has underestimated the central roles of Iowa and New Hampshire within the invisible primary and, thus, party nominations. Since candidates and the news media focus disproportionately on these states early in the nomination season, impressions of candidate performance within these states have a disproportionate influence on the invisible primary long before their actual outcomes are observed. Using a Bayesian …
More Bang for the Buck: Campaign Spending and Fundraising Success
Can candidates spend their way into financial success? We propose that the 2007 presidential money primary offers unprecedented leverage to evaluate spending’s influence since it allows for sharper controls of confounding factors. Our results demonstrate that greater candidate spending on fundraising-related efforts is associated with significant future financial benefits. We estimate that, prior to the primaries, increases in spending have an eq…
Quality Over Quantity: Amici Influence and Judicial Decision Making
Interest groups often make their preferences known on cases before the U.S. Supreme Court via amicus curiae briefs. In evaluating the case and related arguments, we posit that judges take into account more than just the number of supporters for the liberal and conservative positions. Specifically, judges' decisions may also reflect the relative power of the groups. We use network position to measure interest group power in U.S. Supreme Court case…
Following the Money: Super PACs and the 2012 Presidential Nomination
The entrance of Super Political Action Committees (Super PACs ), outside groups with no caps on fundraising or independent expenditures, prompts a reexamination of the role of money in campaigns and elections. We investigate the influence of Super PAC expenditures in the 2012 Republican nomination contest. A compressed calendar makes nomination campaigns expensive and money crucial, especially for lesser‐known candidates, such that outside expend…
Deus ex Machina: Candidate Web Presence and the Presidential Nomination Campaign
Using data from the 2008 presidential nomination contest, we offer systematic tests of the relationships between traditional campaign factors, the Internet and campaign performance. We find that claims of the Internet’s relevance to modern campaigns are warranted, as it is a unique facet of campaigns and significantly improves candidates’ financial and electoral support. The Internet is especially helpful to candidates in generating small-donor c…
Artists of the Possible: Governing Networks and American Policy Change since 1945
Issue-Specific Opinion Change: The Supreme Court and Health Care Reform
Did the Supreme Court decision in the Affordable Care Act case change public opinion about health care reform? Utilizing a multi-wave panel design with observations collected just hours before and after the Court's decision, this study addresses macro-level questions concerning the Court's effect on opinion about health care reform generally and the individual mandate specifically. Findings show that support for health care reform remained consta…
Chief Justice Roberts's Health Care Decision Disrobed: The Microfoundations of the Supreme Court's Legitimacy
The 2012 challenge to the Affordable Care Act was an unusual opportunity for people to form or reassess opinions about the Supreme Court. We utilize panel data coupled with as-if random assignment to reports that Chief Justice Roberts's decision was politically motivated to investigate the microfoundations of the Court's legitimacy. Specifically, we test the effects of changes in individuals' ideological congruence with the Court and exposure to …
Mass Preferences on Shared Representation and the Composition of Legislative Districts
Scholars of redistricting often discuss “communities of interest” as a guideline for drawing districts, but scholarship offers little guidance on how citizens construe communities and interests in the context of representation. In this article, we seek to better understand how citizens’ perceptions of people and places affect preferences regarding representation. Using an original survey conducted in 15 Massachusetts communities, we explore wheth…
Comparing membership interest group networks across space and time, size, issue and industry
We compare and contrast the network formation of interest groups across industry and issue area. We focus on membership interest groups, which by virtue of representing the interests of voluntary members face particular organizational and maintenance constraints. To reveal their cooperative behavior we build a network dataset based on cosigner status to United States Supreme Court amicus curiae briefs and analyze it with exponential random graph …
Polls & Elections: Superdelegates or Supertrustees ? The Timing and Consistency of Superdelegate Decisions
Do superdelegates heed public opinion in deciding whom to support in nomination contests or do they follow their own conscience? We examine both individual and environmental factors peculiar to superdelegate decision making to ascertain whether and how they integrate populist considerations into their nomination choices. Via a survey of superdelegates in the 2008 presidential nomination contest, we analyze both the timing of a superdelegate's dec…
The Specter of Supreme Court Criticism: Public Opinion and Unilateral Action
The conventional wisdom suggests that the judicial constraint on presidential unilateralism is weak: judicial challenges are rare and successful ones rarer still. However, we argue that courts have grown increasingly assertive in checking important unilateral policy initiatives in both the foreign and domestic arenas. This judicial reassertion also raises the prospect that courts may exert a more informal constraint on presidential power. Utilizi…
Who Votes for the Future? Information, Expectations, and Endogeneity in Economic Voting
All the President's Senators: Presidential Copartisans and the Allocation of Federal Grants
Previous scholarship argues that House members' partisan relationship to the president is among the most important determinants of the share of federal dollars they bring home to their constituents. Do presidential politics also shape distributive outcomes in the Senate? Analyzing the allocation of more than $8.5 trillion of federal grants across the states from 1984 to 2008, we show that presidential copartisan senators are more successful than …
Mobilizing the Public Against the President: Congress and the Political Costs of Unilateral Action
Prior scholarship overlooks the capacity of other actors to raise the political costs of unilateral action by turning public opinion against the president. Through a series of five experiments embedded in nationally representative surveys, we demonstrate Congress's ability to erode support for unilateral actions by raising both constitutional and policy‐based objections to the exercise of unilateral power. Congressional challenges to the unilater…
Constitutional Qualms or Politics as Usual? The Factors Shaping Public Support for Unilateral Action
The formal institutional constraints that Congress and the courts impose on presidential unilateral action are feeble. As a result, recent scholarship suggests that public opinion may be the strongest check against executive overreach. However, little is known about how the public assesses unilateral action. Through a series of five survey experiments embedded in nationally representative surveys, we examine the extent to which Americans evaluate…
Modeling Unobserved Heterogeneity in Social Networks with the Frailty Exponential Random Graph Model
In the study of social processes, the presence of unobserved heterogeneity is a regular concern. It should be particularly worrisome for the statistical analysis of networks, given the complex dependencies that shape network formation combined with the restrictive assumptions of related models. In this paper, we demonstrate the importance of explicitly accounting for unobserved heterogeneity in exponential random graph models (ERGM) with a Monte …
Role analysis using the ego-ERGM: A look at environmental interest group coalitions
The Myth of the Imperial Presidency: How Public Opinion Checks the Unilateral Executive
Reassessing the Supreme Court: How Decisions and Negativity Bias Affect Legitimacy
While the Supreme Court’s legitimacy is generally considered essential to its influence, scholars continue to debate whether the Court’s decisions affect individuals’ assessments of it. The last week of the 2013 term provides an unusual opportunity to evaluate these issues because the Court made a conservative decision concerning the Voting Rights Act (VRA) only one day before it made a liberal one about same-sex marriage. We use original panel d…
Cue‐Taking in Congress: Interest Group Signals from Dear Colleague Letters
Why do some pieces of legislation move forward while others languish? We address this fundamental question by examining the role of interest groups in Congress, specifically the effect of their legislative endorsements in Dear Colleague letters. These letters provide insights into the information that members use to both influence and make policy decisions. We demonstrate that endorsements from particularly well‐connected interest groups are a st…
Bad characters or just more polarization? The rise of extremely negative feelings for presidential candidates
Political science (35 works) · Law (30 works) · Politics (29 works) · Law (26 works) · Electoral Systems and Political Participation (22 works) · Economics (20 works) · Presidential system (12 works) · Sociology (12 works) · Judicial and Constitutional Studies (10 works) · Law and economics (10 works)