Co-auteur
  • FOUCAULT Martial (20)
  • TIBERJ Vincent (18)
  • GROSSMAN Emiliano (10)
  • GUINAUDEAU Isabelle (9)
  • Voir plus
Type de Document
  • Article (38)
  • Partie ou chapitre de livre (16)
  • Rapport (9)
  • Article de presse ou magazine (5)
  • Voir plus
in European Journal of Political Research Publié en 2021-09
STERNBERG Sebastian
HÖNNIGE Christoph
0
vues

0
téléchargements
Can constitutional court decisions shape public opinion on a governmental policy? Previous studies have focused on the US Supreme Court, which enjoys a high degree of public support as the major resource of power for courts. In this study, we examine the extent to which courts can influence public opinion regarding a government bill at European courts. First, we argue that the public support for courts also allows them to move public opinion on policies into the direction of their decisions. This works in both directions: they can confer legitimacy to a policy that they support, but they can also de-legitimize a policy that they oppose. Second, we argue that this mechanism strongly depends on the amount of support that a court receives. It only has an effect for courts that possess a higher institutional legitimacy and among the group of citizens trusting a court. We test our arguments by combining a most different systems design for France and Germany with a survey priming experiment on a school security bill. France and Germany are selected for a most different systems design as they exhibit different institutional designs as well as different levels of support for the court at the aggregate level. The survey experiment is implemented within large national election surveys, the German Internet Panel and the French National Election Study. Both experiments contain more than 2,600 respondents each. Our survey experiment primes for decision outcomes and different institutions to understand whether there are differences between an institution supporting and opposing a policy and between a court and alternative institutions. Our findings confirm that with higher public support, courts can move the opinion of citizens to both legitimize and de-legitimize a policy. This effect can be found at the aggregate level for a court enjoying higher public support, but also at the individual level for respondents with higher trust in the court. Interestingly, courts can even move the opinion of citizens with strong prior attitudes in the opposite direction, if these citizens highly trust the court. These findings have implications beyond the study itself. First, they confirm that the legitimacyconferring effect can also be observed for European courts, not only for the US Supreme Court. Second, they show that the relevance of a mechanism identified for a single case, like the US Supreme Court, might only hold for specific conditions. As public support for courts strongly varies across countries in Europe, we also expect the impact of any mechanism relying on public support to strongly vary, as we can observe in our own analysis.

6
vues

0
téléchargements
Objective We measure the prevalence of noncompliance with public health guidelines in the COVID-19 pandemic and examine how it is shaped by political ideology across countries. Methods A list experiment of noncompliance and a multi-item scale of health-related behaviors were embedded in a comparative survey of 11,000 respondents in nine OCED countries. We conduct a statistical analysis of the list experiment capturing degrees of noncompliance with social distancing rules and estimate ideological effect heterogeneity. A semiparametric analysis examines the functional form of the relationship between ideology and the propensity to violate public health guidelines. Results Our analyses reveal substantial heterogeneity between countries. Ideology plays an outsized role in the United States. No association of comparable magnitude is found in the majority of the other countries in our study. In many settings, the impact of ideology on health-related behaviors is nonlinear. Conclusion Our results highlight the importance of taking a comparative perspective. Extrapolating the role of ideology from the United States to other advanced industrialized societies might paint an erroneous picture of the scope of possible nonpharmaceutical interventions. Heterogeneity limits the extent to which policymakers can learn from experiences across borders.

in Electoral Studies Publié en 2021-02
VASILOPOULOS Pavlos
GOROHOUNA Samuel
HÖNNIGE Christoph
83
vues

0
téléchargements
In this article we examine the impact of emotions in an independence referendum. New Caledonia – a French Pacific territory with 270,000 inhabitants – held a self-determination referendum in November 2018, in which 56% of the voters opted to remain a part of France. We conducted a post-referendum survey with 1496 respondents that included a specific battery to measure emotions as well as control variables. We find that experiencing anger with the national status of the territory increases the probability of voting for independence, while experiencing pride reduces it. These results remain after controlling for partisan, ethnic and national identification, expected effects of independence as well as sociodemographic factors. Moreover, emotions and identity interact and increase the effect of (the lack of) national identification. Beyond the effects of the traditional control variables, the results suggest that knowledge about voting behavior in independence referendums is transferable to decolonization in Pacific Islands.

The assumption that increasing diversity and economic hardship boost support for the far right is widespread, yet extant research comes up with contradictory findings. This article investigates the link between context and the far right by investigating the impact of immigration and unemployment on voting for Marine Le Pen in the first round of the 2017 French Presidential election. We match a large individual-level survey with contextual variables constructed from the census describing voters’ residential environments. Unlike previous studies, we measure immigration and unemployment at the neighborhood level and the broader level of the department. Using a multilevel model, we find that voters in neighborhoods with high levels of immigration are less likely to vote for the far right. However, in departments, increased immigration and unemployment correlate with greater support for Le Pen. These findings suggest that contact theory and ethnic threat operate differently according to spatial scale.

in PLos ONE Publié en 2021
DAOUST Jean-François
BÉLANGER Eric
DASSONNEVILLE Ruth
LACHAPELLE Erik, Département De Science Politique
NADEAU Richard
BECHER Michael
HÖNNIGE Christoph
STEGMUELLER Daniel
6
vues

0
téléchargements
Studies of citizens’ compliance with COVID-19 preventive measures routinely rely on survey data. While such data are essential, public health restrictions provide clear signals of what is socially desirable in this context, creating a potential source of response bias in self-reported measures of compliance. In this research, we examine whether the results of a guilt-free strategy recently proposed to lessen this constraint are generalizable across twelve countries, and whether the treatment effect varies across subgroups. Our findings show that the guilt-free strategy is a useful tool in every country included, increasing respondents’ proclivity to report non-compliance by 9 to 16 percentage points. This effect holds for different subgroups based on gender, age and education. We conclude that the inclusion of this strategy should be the new standard for survey research that aims to provide crucial data on the current pandemic.

in West European Politics Publié en 2021
ALTIPARMAKIS Argyrios
BOJAR Abel
KRIESI Hanspeter
NADEAU Richard
12
vues

0
téléchargements
The COVID-19 crisis has demanded that governments take restrictive measures that are abnormal for most representative democracies. This article aims to examine the determinants of the public’s evaluations towards those measures. This article focuses on political trust and partisanship as potential explanatory factors of evaluations of each government’s health and economic measures to address the COVID-19 crisis. To study these relationships between trust, partisanship and evaluation of measures, data from a novel comparative panel survey is utilised, comprising eleven democracies and three waves, conducted in spring 2020. This article provides evidence that differences in evaluations of the public health and economic measures between countries also depend on contextual factors, such as polarisation and the timing of the measures’ introduction by each government. Results show that the public’s approval of the measures depends strongly on their trust in the national leaders, an effect augmented for voters of the opposition.

in West European Politics Publié en 2021
KRITZINGER Sylvia
PARTHEYMÜLLER Julia
PLESCIA Caroliona
43
vues

0
téléchargements
During international crises, trust in government is expected to increase irrespective of the wisdom of the policies it pursues. This has been called a ‘rally-round-the-flag’ effect. This article examines whether the COVID-19 crisis has resulted in such a rally effect. Using multi-wave panel surveys conducted in Austria and France starting from March 2020, in the article it is examined how government trust was affected by the perceived threats to the nation’s health and economy created by the pandemic as well as by the perceived appropriateness of the government’s crisis response. A strong rally effect is shown in Austria, where trust was closely tied to perceived health risks, but faded away quickly over time. Perceptions of government measures mattered, too, while perceived economic threat only played a minor role. In France, in contrast, a strong partisan divide is found and no rally effect.

40
vues

0
téléchargements
Bien que les deux tiers des clusters identifiés de l’épidémie de Covid-19 en France concernent les entreprises, les établissements d’enseignement ainsi que ceux de santé, le président de la République a choisi de lutter contre la deuxième vague de l’épidémie par une nouvelle limitation, nocturne plutôt que géographique, de la liberté d’aller et venir. [Premier paragraphe]

in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) Publié en 2020-10
GALASSO Vincenzo
PROFETA Paola
PONS Vincent
BECHER Michael
12
vues

0
téléchargements
The initial public health response to the breakout of COVID-19 required fundamental changes in individual behavior, such as isolation at home or wearing masks. The effectiveness of these policies hinges on generalized public obedience. Yet, people’s level of compliance may depend on their beliefs regarding the pandemic. We use original data from two waves of a survey conducted in March and April 2020 in eight Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries (n = 21,649) to study gender differences in COVID-19−related beliefs and behaviors. We show that women are more likely to perceive COVID-19 as a very serious health problem, to agree with restraining public policy measures, and to comply with them. Gender differences in attitudes and behavior are sizable in all countries. They are accounted for neither by sociodemographic and employment characteristics nor by psychological and behavioral factors. They are only partially mitigated for individuals who cohabit or have direct exposure to the virus. We show that our results are not due to differential social desirability bias. This evidence has important implications for public health policies and communication on COVID-19, which may need to be gender based, and it unveils a domain of gender differences: behavioral changes in response to a new risk.

in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) Publié en 2020-10
GALASSO Vincenzo
PONS Vincent
PROFETA Paola
BECHER Michael
117
vues

0
téléchargements
Public health response to COVID-19 requires behavior changes—isolation at home, wearing masks. Its effectiveness depends on generalized compliance. Original data from two waves of a survey conducted in March−April 2020 in eight Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries (n = 21,649) show large gender differences in COVID-19−related beliefs and behaviors. Women are more likely to perceive the pandemic as a very serious health problem and to agree and comply with restraining measures. These differences are only partially mitigated for individuals cohabiting or directly exposed to COVID-19. This behavioral factor contributes to substantial gender differences in mortality and is consistent with women-led countries responding more effectively to the pandemic. It calls for gender-based public health policies and communication.

Suivant