Search

Refugees arriving in Western countries spend long periods, often over a year, as asylum seekers. We examine how the period affects asylum seekers' institutional and interpersonal trust. Drawing on theories of need gratification, we suggest that several needs are unfulfilled during this period of existential limbo. Still, some aspects in the new society are positive, especially in Sweden, the host country of this study. To study these combined forces, we rely on repeated interviews with the same asylum seekers as well as other quantitative approaches. Results show that both types of trust are reduced over time, suggesting that the negative aspects take precedence. We also present results based on a matching analysis, which indicate that interpersonal trust at the beginning of the asylum-seeking process is higher compared to similar refugees in Jordan and Lebanon. Overall, our results show that trust can be highly malleable in certain circumstances. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In a panel study where one survey was conducted immediately after a terrorist attack in central Stockholm, with over 20,000 participants, we examine the possibility that first-hand experiences with terror increases effects compared to people located elsewhere in Sweden. We use matching and as-if random variation in our data to identify the effect of personal proximity. While we find that people close to the attack perceived themselves as more affected, attesting to the vividness of the experience, we find no evidence of stronger rally effects, greater outgroup dislike, preferences for security policies or emotional effects. The results challenge previous theories on public opinion change in the aftermath of vivid events. In line with prior research, however, the results indicate that public opinion among people across Sweden did change on a range of issues. These general effects occurred uniformly, regardless of geographic location in the country. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We study how Swedish citizens updated their institutional and interpersonal trust as the corona crisis evolved from an initial phase to an acute phase in the spring of 2020. The study is based on a large web‐survey panel with adult Swedes (n = 11,406) in which the same individuals were asked the same set of questions at two different time points during the coronavirus pandemic (t0 and t1). The sample was self‐selected but diverse (a smaller subsample, n = 1,464, was pre‐stratified to be representative of the Swedish population on key demographics). We find support for the view that the corona crisis led to higher levels of institutional and interpersonal trust. Moreover, reactions were largely homogeneous across those groups that could potentially relate distantly to government authorities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Immediately following dramatic events, news reporting must be both fast and accurate. In an attempt to reconcile the inherent conflict between these two ambitions, journalists often use disclaimers, for example, "unconfirmed" or "reports of." These disclaimers allow for the rapid publication of less than reliable content. The results from our survey experiment suggest that strong disclaimers, as intended, do lower the perceived reliability of stories among news consumers. Furthermore, the results indicate that the context influences the effectiveness of disclaimers. It appears that in a crisis environment, such as after a large terrorist attack, individuals are less sensitive to disclaimers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Preelectoral party coalitions are common in multiparty systems. We examine the proposition that individuals who choose between parties from competing coalitions think and behave differently compared to those who only consider voting for parties of the same coalition. Part of the reason, we suggest, is that coalition‐straddling voters play a key role in deciding who forms government. Methods: We rely on data from a multiwave panel with thousands of participants collected during two election campaigns in Sweden. Statistical regression techniques are used to analyze the data. Results: We find that citizens who straddle opposing coalitions think that the vote decision is harder and rely more on voting advice applications. Moreover, the evidence suggests that their ultimate vote choice is more consequential in how they view parties. Conclusion: Coalition‐straddling influences political behavior. The evidence is largely in line with the notion that coalition‐straddling individuals are aware of their importance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Compassion-evoking and widely circulated news images seem capable of affecting public opinion and change history. A case in point is the picture of the drowned toddler Alan Kurdi, who died while trying to escape to Europe with his family in September 2015. We theorise how these types of photos affect public opinion. By relying on panel data with sequentially embedded survey experiments conducted in the aftermath of the picture's publication and while large numbers of refugees were coming to Europe, we demonstrate that the image of Alan Kurdi had context-varying effects on policy preferences. Initially, the upsetting photo of the toddler increased support for liberal refugee policies across ideological divides. However, when individuals had the time to think about policy implications, they started processing even this highly upsetting picture through their ideology. Consequently, our results indicate that compassion-evoking images shift meaning over time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Need for cognition (NFC) is the personality trait that describes differences in the enjoyment of cognitive efforts. By relying on data collected over two elections in Sweden in 2014, I show the trait's multifaceted political relevance. Individuals who enjoy cognitive challenges are more likely to think that it matters what government that is formed after the election, engage with campaign information, favor complex news over simple news and select stronger reasons for vote choice over weaker, e.g., ideology over habit. Overall, the results suggest that election studies would benefit from measuring need for cognition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract During a vote-decision process, citizens elect between some of the parties – not all of them. In this paper, we explore a potential strategic reason to include an additional alternative in the consideration set. Drawing on research from the field of strategic voting, we study incentives to defect to a party at risk of falling below an electoral threshold in order to elect a winning coalition ("insurance"). Our argument is that these types of strategic considerations occur already in the campaign, but do not always translate into choice. Using the so-called consideration set model approach (CSM), which focuses on how voters select fewer alternatives among a larger number of parties, we model vote choice over an election campaign using panel data from the Swedish National Election Studies of 2014. In line with our argument, we demonstrate that the insurance strategy was prevalent earlier in the decision-making process, when forming the consideration set. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With the changing polling environment and the difficulties in correctly measuring public opinion, it is crucial to study the effects of polling practices. Elections provide an opportunity to examine how well polls measure support for political parties and how polling practices influence the accuracy of polls. Based on 110 pre-election polls conducted in Sweden, a multiparty system, we find that probability-based samples yield more accurate polls compared to opt-in Internet samples. Thus, our results point to a tradeoff between inexpensive online polls and accuracy. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Years of research show that left-leaning individuals are more supportive of environmental policies than right-leaning individuals. The explanation for the lower level of support among right-leaning individuals is their stronger preference for economic growth and lower acceptance of intervention in markets. However, recent cross-national studies have questioned whether the effect of ideology on environmental support is universal. A Swedish survey experiment shows that the effect of ideology varies greatly depending on how individuals think about the environment. Specifically, it demonstrates that if environmental support is contrasted with economic growth, then the effect of ideology is stronger as opposed to when environmental support is not juxtaposed with economic growth. Furthermore, among people who strongly perceive the environment as a left–right issue, there is a larger divide between left and right. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the validity and political relevance of the need for cognition.

Trust in one's fellow citizens and in politicians are both conducive to well-functioning government. Beyond their separate importance, it is a long-standing notion that generalized social trust and political trust are connected in a mutually reinforcing relationship that further undergirds democratic governance. While it is well established that social trust and political trust are robustly positively associated at the individual level, there is much less compelling evidence regarding the causal nature of this relationship. Previous analyses have been unable to adequately rule out confounding and correct for reverse causality. This paper tackles these challenges through data and a research design close to ideally suited for addressing the causal status of the relationship. Using a 20-wave individual-level panel survey from Sweden analyzed using a dynamic panel model, we find evidence for a relatively strong positive causal effect of political trust on social trust, but little evidence for the reverse relationship. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What is the effect of the state's decision to grant or reject a residence permit on asylum seekers? Relying on repeated surveys with recently arrived asylum seekers to Sweden, we examine what seems to be a random migration decision from the perspective of the asylum seekers to evaluate how the "limbo" nature of the waiting period, and the subsequent rejection or acceptance, shapes asylum seekers' life satisfaction, health, horizontal trust in Swedes, and vertical trust in Swedish institutions. The migration decision meaningfully affects not only their well-being, but also shapes their attitudes towards the host country's institutions and people: "acceptance" yields positive evaluations of their personal lives and the host country, while "rejection" renders the opposite. Importantly, few differences in evaluations emerge between those in "limbo" and those denied. As potential future members of the state, these findings inform our understanding of how the migration decision is meaningful for asylum seekers' experiences with exclusion and inclusion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]