Working Papers
Preprints link to OSF or similar repositories. Papers marked “available upon request” can be obtained by email.
Working Papers
-
“When Social Democrats Move Right on Migration, Who Responds? Lessons from Germany's Social Democrats”Under ReviewOSF Link
Abstract
Social democratic parties increasingly seek to appeal to voters by adopting restrictive positions on immigration. Research indicates that such appeals are unlikely to help: they may alienate left-leaning voters and legitimize far-right frames. We examine this in the context of former Chancellor Olaf Scholz's turn on immigration -- a historic shift for Germany’s Social Democrats, who had previously avoided restrictive stances on migration. Using an unexpected event design and data from the European Social Survey, we find that SPD supporters remained unaffected, while attitudes in the political center briefly shifted toward more restrictive views. These effects faded quickly and did not translate into higher support for the SPD, suggesting that accommodation offers little electoral reward. -
“The Consequences of Punishing Political Ideologies in Democracies – Evidence from Employment Bans in Germany”Under ReviewOSF Link
Abstract
How can states counter growing political radicalism? We look at the effect of states persecuting “extreme” individuals by studying the case of the Anti-Radical Decree in West Germany. Implemented in 1972, this policy allowed individuals with connections to mostly communist groups to be banned from working in the public sector. Drawing upon a newly collected data set of individuals targeted by the bans, we run regression models to estimate the effect of such bans on the political behavior of German citizens measured in surveys and official election results. In particular, we look at the long-term effects of the bans by estimating their effects on establishing the Green party, formed a few years after the policy was first implemented. We find that counties that experienced bans are significantly more likely to take protest against the bans on the streets and subsequently vote for the Green party. Added to that individuals, who voice opposition to the bans in surveys are more likely to support the Greens. The effect is stronger in counties that were more leftist, politicized, and had more public sector workers. Our findings have implications for the sets of policies democracies can use to ensure their institutional survival. -
“Does Protest Affect Bystanders? Field Experimental Evidence from Germany”Under ReviewOSF Link
Abstract
Despite decades of scholarship on protest effects, we know little about how bystanders, citizens who merely observe protests without participating, are affected by them. Understanding the impact of protest on bystanders is crucial as they constitute the silent majority whose latent support, normative beliefs, and concrete actions can make or break a movement's broader societal impact. We address this gap with a novel field experiment in Berlin, Germany, randomly routing pedestrians past (treatment) or away from control three large-scale Fridays for Future (FFF) climate strikes. Additionally, we conducted a one-month follow-up to assess the persistence of effects. We find no detectable impact on climate attitudes, vote intentions, or norm perceptions but a substantial increase in immediate donations to climate causes. These results suggest that protest is more likely to influence bystanders through immediate behavioral cues than through changes in attitudes or norms. Our findings challenge the prevailing assumption in both scholarship and public discourse that protests reshape public opinion in a direct and unmediated way, calling for renewed theorizing of protest effects that centers on observers' immediate behavioral activation rather than just opinion change mechanisms. -
“Democratic Transgressions Embedded in Reality”Under ReviewOSF Link
Abstract
Research on citizens and democratic backsliding has skyrocketed over the past decade. Most of this research has focused on why citizens might tolerate hypothetical undemocratic behavior carried out in the abstract by hypothetical actors. We present a theoretical framework and use a two-wave panel survey from six challenged democracies (the United States, Hungary, Poland, Brazil, Mexico, and India) to assess the consequences of this approach. In the first wave, we develop an alternative survey instrument based on real-world democratic transgressions and compare support for such transgressions to typical hypothetical behaviors. In the second wave, we construct an intervention to compare how easily support for real-world transgressions is moved vis-à-vis support for hypothetical transgressions. Our results show that support for real-world undemocratic behaviors is substantially higher but also easier to intervene against. We therefore question two core findings of existing research: that citizens on balance oppose undemocratic behaviors and that interventions against undemocratic behavior often are ineffective. -
“How Citizens Perceive Others: The Role of Social Norms for Democracies”OSF Link
Abstract
Generations of political scientists seek to understand the relationship between citizens' democratic values and democratic stability. The key premise of this research tradition is that democratic societies live on a “social consensus” over a set of democratic values; a democratic norm. Yet, until today scholarship has neither carefully theorized the role of nor measured the social nature of this consensus. Building on research in social psychology, we conceptualize democratic norms as social norms: citizens may think that most people in democracies support its institutions (descriptive norm) and also that one ought to do so (injunctive norm). We then measure these perceptions across 14 countries using nationally representative surveys covering 31 -
“Place-Based Policies and Inequality Within Regions”OSF Link
Abstract
What are the distributional effects of placed-based policies? Drawing on household data from 2.4 million survey respondents in the European Union (EU), we show that income inequality within European regions is substantial, has widened since the 1990s and contributes more to overall inequality than cross-regional inequality. Using regression discontinuity and difference-in-differences designs, we find that the world's largest place-based policy, the EU's Cohesion Policy, increases incomes for affluent households but barely affects low-income households in supported regions. Evidence on mechanisms demonstrates that place-based funds exacerbate intra-regional inequality by primarily boosting labor incomes for the highly skilled. -
“What Citizens Mean by Democracy: Evidence from Open- and Closed-Ended Survey Responses”Available Upon Request
Abstract
Why do citizens report high support for democracy in standard survey questions even as democratic backsliding advances in many countries? We address this puzzle by comparing two ways of measuring democratic orientations: an open-ended question asking respondents to define democracy in their own words and closed-ended items asking whether they endorse specific democratic principles. Drawing on more than 25,000 survey responses from representative samples in 14 countries, we use a fine-tuned language model to classify open-ended answers into substantive dimensions. First, across countries, citizens most often define democracy in terms of individual and civil rights, while multidimensional conceptions are rare. Second, open- and closed-ended measures diverge systematically. Center-right voters invoke liberal-democratic language at rates similar to the center-left, yet they are less supportive of minority rights and electoral norms when prompted. Far-right voters stand out more clearly in open-ended responses, where majoritarian conceptions are more prevalent than among other electorates. -
“When the Well-Off Feel Left Behind: Income Misperception and Populist Attitudes”Available Upon Request
Abstract
Why do materially secure citizens embrace populist attitudes? Existing explanations emphasize economic hardship or cultural backlash. We argue that these accounts miss a belief-based source of grievance: citizens may underestimate their relative economic standing and feel deprived despite being objectively well off. Using representative German panel data, we show that pessimistic income-rank misperceptions predict stronger populist attitudes conditional on actual rank. We support this interpretation with an instrumental-variable design and within-household comparisons that address omitted local context, shared household income, and unobserved household-level characteristics. A preregistered survey experiment replicates the observational pattern in its control arm and shows that personalized rank information corrects beliefs and shifts income satisfaction, but does not reduce populist attitudes. Material position and cultural grievance are therefore not competing explanations: political discontent can emerge from how citizens interpret their economic position, while remaining resistant to one-shot correction. -
“Parliamentary representation and right-wing violence: Evidence from Nazi street brawls in the Weimar Republic”Available Upon Request
Abstract
A core promise of democracy is to transform political violence into non-violent, institutionalized conflict in parliament. But elections can also incite bloodshed: they can trigger grievances among election losers and equip election winners who oppose democracy---such as the fascist right---with resources to orchestrate even more violence. Does parliamentary representation curb or fuel right-wing street violence? We investigate this question in the context of the July 1932 Reichstag elections in Weimar Germany. We match the home towns of Nazi party candidates to locations of street violence from digitized Prussian police records. Exploiting the randomness between candidates who did and did not receive just enough votes to attain a Reichstag seat we identify the effects of Nazi representation in parliament on street brawls in the Weimar Republic. Initial results indicate that parliamentary representation led to more street violence in elected candidates' home towns, especially when NSDAP candidates had links to the Nazi paramilitary organization, the SA. Our findings have important implications for our understanding of post-election violence, consequences of right-wing representation, and democratic stability. -
“Norms over Preferences: How Social Expectations and Partisan Cues Shape Online Deliberation”Available Upon Request
Abstract
Deliberative mini-publics are widely promoted as tools of democratic renewal, yet deliberation increasingly unfolds online, where social cues and normative pressures differ from face-to-face settings. While existing research evaluates opinion change and deliberative quality, we know less about how identity-based signals structure behavior in digital mini-publics. We present evidence from a large, pre-registered visual conjoint experiment in Germany that emulates the online platform of the Conference on the Future of Europe. Participants evaluated realistic policy proposals varying in partisan affiliation, demographic traits, geographic proximity, and visible public endorsements. We find that partisan identity functions as a powerful normative cue: proposals from out-party actors are systematically discounted; even when substantively aligned with participants’ views. Demographic cues matter little. Public endorsement signals shape perceptions of others' attitudes but rarely affect individual behavior, suggesting pluralistic ignorance. These findings indicate that online deliberation is structured by norm-guided conformity, constraining cross-cutting agreement and limiting the epistemic potential of digital mini-publics. -
“Does Exposure to Radical Right Rallies Affect Political Behavior and Preferences -- Evidence From the Far Right Pegida Movement in Germany”Available Upon Request
Abstract
What are the effects of far right movements on citizens' electoral behavior and preferences? Previous research implies that protests and social movements can sway the public towards their goals. However research that actually studies the effect of local protests on the local community and public is scarce. Collecting the full history of local mobilization by a German anti-migration, radical right movement -- the `Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamicisation of the Occident (PEGIDA)' -- on the street-level I study the effects on the affected communities by using Difference-in-Differences and matching methods. I find that PEGIDA increased voting for radical right parties and made the public support stricter limits on migration. But not all citizens react equally: the effects are driven by mainstream right voters, while the left backlashes. The findings have important implications for the study of public opinion in contemporary societies and political science understanding of protesters' relevance.