Articles in Refereed Journals

“Religion and Attitudes Toward Redistributive Policies Among Americans.” Political Research Quarterly. With Nicholas T. Davis, James C. Garand, and Laura R. Olson.

Abstract: Scholars have devoted considerable attention to understanding how individuals’ political and economic attitudes shape their views toward government policies designed to alleviate growing income inequality in the United States. However, much less attention has been paid to the question of how religion shapes Americans’ attitudes toward income inequality and redistributive policies. Using data drawn from the 2013 Economic Values Survey conducted by the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI), we explore the role that religion—including religious affiliation, the degree and nature of religiosity, the nexus of politics and religion, and interpretations of biblical text—plays in structuring individuals’ attitudes toward government redistribution policies. We find that religious affiliation and participation do not meaningfully shape attitudes toward redistributive policies; however, identification with the “religious right” and specific interpretations of scripture do influence how Americans think about redistribution. These findings provide evidence that standard treatments of religion focusing primarily on affiliation and religiosity may have somewhat limited explanatory power with regard to attitudes about issues that fall outside of the standard “culture wars” framework, at least relative to the explanatory power of more specific expressions of religious belief.

“Religious Right, Religious Left, Both, or Neither? Understanding Religious Ideological Identification.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. With Laura R. Olson and James C. Garand.

Abstract: In this article we analyze the effects of religious, political, socioeconomic, and demographic variables on religious Americans’ propensity to identify with religio‐political movements. Using data from the 2013 Economic Values Survey collected by the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI), we sort nonsecular Americans into four categories: religious right, religious left, both religious right and religious left, or neither religious right nor the religious left. We estimate a multinomial logit model in which we depict religio‐political identification as a function of religious affiliation, worship attendance, religious embeddedness, religious convictions, political attitudes, and socioeconomic and demographic controls. We find that a wide range of religious, political, and socioeconomic/demographic variables affect individuals’ identification with the religious right and/or religious left. Our empirical results also permit us to analyze the seeming paradox of identifying with both the religious right and the religious left. We find that individuals who identify with both movements come from the ranks of the highly religious, those who believe that being moral requires one to believe in God, Tea Party supporters, strong partisans, those with lower education and income, older individuals, and blacks and Hispanics.

“Understanding Evangelical Protestant Identity, Religiosity, Extreme Weather, and American Public Perceptions of Global Warming, 2006-2016.” Geographical Review. With Waynun Shao.

Abstract: This paper presents a comprehensive effort to analyze the relationship between evangelical Protestant identity and religiosity along with socio-economic characteristics, political predisposition, and extreme weather events on one hand, and opinions toward global warming on the other. Using survey data from Pew Research Center from 2006 – 2013 and 2016 American National Election Study merged with extreme weather data from the Center for Disease and Control from 2005 – 2016, several major findings stand out. First, evangelical Protestants are less likely to believe in the existence and seriousness of global warming than others. Second, those who are more religious are less likely to view global warming as human caused and a serious problem than their less religious counterparts. Lastly, the effects of extreme weather represented by heavy precipitation and extreme heat on one’s perceptions of global warming existence, cause, and seriousness are largely absent. We suspect that the public awareness of extreme weather events being linked with climate change has been heightened in recent years. More studies using data post 2016 are warranted to examine how extreme weather determines public perceptions of global warming.

“Two Sides of the Coin: Women, Men, and the Politics of Sexual Harassment.” Journal of Women, Politics & Policy. With Stephen C. Craig and Paulina Cossette.

Abstract: History tells us that elected leaders who are tainted by scandal often pay a political price for their behavior. In the past few years, such allegations of sexual harassment have engulfed a large number of political (as well as entertainment, business, and even academic) figures. Many were forced to resign their positions, while others chose to end their campaigns for election or re-election. While the great majority of harassment victims are women, there are a few instances where the sex roles have been reversed – and with more women running for and winning public office (and thereby gaining positions of power and authority), it is possible that we will see more such role reversals in the future. Our study uses data from an internet-based survey of registered voters to examine citizens' attitudes about sexual harassment and the extent to which those attitudes shape their reactions when allegations of harassment are made against a fictional member of Congress. With an innovative experimental design, we will examine whether reactions vary with (a) either the target's or the voter's gender or (b) the former's response to the allegations of sexual misconduct made against him/her (denial, apology, counterframe).​

“Question-Wording and Attitudinal Ambivalence: COVID, the Economy, and Americans' Response to a Real-Life Trolley Problem.” Social Science Quarterly. With Stephen C. Craig and Jason Gainous.

Abstract: As the coronavirus pandemic raged during the summer and fall of 2000, political leaders faced a difficult choice. Should strict social distancing guidelines be maintained until the threat posed by COVID-19 was diminished enough for citizens to return to their regular activities? Or was the massive economic disruption caused by the pandemic a consequence that was, according to President Trump, ”worse than the problem itself”? Data from a national survey of registered voters confirm the findings of prior research: Democrats were more likely than Republicans to resolve this potential trade-off in favor of protecting public health. More importantly, however, we find that when faced with this moral dilemma (as measured by one’s choice between a utilitarian vs. a deontological approach when confronted with a real-life "trolley problem"), many Americans from both sides of the partisan aisle were of two minds on the subject.

Working Papers

“Perceptions of Effectiveness: How Legislators’ Performance Influences Political Behavior”

Abstract: What is the influence of legislative effectiveness on citizens’ attitudes toward their legislators? Previous works have demonstrated that legislative effectiveness is not only essential to the democratic process, but also that legislators view effectiveness as a necessary aspect of their job in the hopes of getting reelected and advancing their careers. While scholarly literature emphasizes the importance of effectiveness, there has been little analysis on effectiveness and how it relates to public opinion. Using data from Volden and Wiseman (2016) and the Cumulative American National Election Study (CANES), I have compiled a unique dataset in which I explore the role of legislative effectiveness and public opinion. Specifically, I am interested in the relationship between effectiveness and approval of Congress or one’s legislator. I find that there is no significant or consistent relationship between legislator effectiveness and approval of Congress or approval of the House incumbent. However, legislative effectiveness influences one’s ratings of their House incumbent candidate. When exploring the mediating effects of partisanship, I find that partisanship greatly contributes to the assessments of legislators. Individuals use their partisan affiliation and the partisan affiliation of their representative as a tool to evaluate Congress or their House incumbent candidate.  

“Pluralism and Freedom: Perspectives on the First Amendment.” With Shayna Schulman (Undergraduate Student at the University of Florida).

Abstract: To what extent does the American public support pluralism? Specifically, we are interested in discerning support for (1) the ability to choose one’s religion, (2) life practices without facing discrimination, (3) the practice of religious beliefs even when those are contrary to majority practices, (4) prayer or worship without fear of persecution, and (5) tolerance and respect regarding beliefs about God. We merge 2019 and 2020 Religious Freedom Index data to create a unique and comprehensive dataset of over 2,000 respondents. Preliminary analysis reveals racial and generational differences among attitudes toward religious pluralism freedoms. For example, Hispanic and Black respondents are less supportive of religious freedoms compared to white respondents. Also, Generation Z and Millennials are less supportive of religious freedoms than Generation X and Baby Boomers. In contrast, previous literature shows that religious identities have become more fluid, leading younger generations to have higher interfaith tolerance, diversity, and inclusion (Putnam and Campbell 2010). In sum, we seek to shed light on these differences and the (possible) inconsistencies in the literature.

“Continuity and Change in the Determinants and Effects of Attitudes Toward Same-sex Marriage, 2004-2020.” With James C. Garand. 

Abstract: To what extent have attitudes toward same-sex marriage changed in the mass public? The purpose of this paper is to explore the changing politics of same-sex marriage in the American mass public from 2004 to 2016 and to highlight those determinants of attitudes toward same-sex marriage. Using data from the American National Election Study, and building on the work of Gaines and Garand (2010), we begin by estimating a model in which we depict general attitudes toward same-sex marriage as a function of (1) moral and religious attitudes, (2) attitudes toward gays and lesbians, (3) support for gender and minority rights, (4) symbolic politics attitudes, and (5) demographic and socioeconomic variables. We focus attention on how Americans think about same-sex marriage and the changing effects of these variables. Next, we consider how Americans’ views toward same-sex marriage influence both vote choice and turnout. We are particularly interested in the degree to which positive and negative attitudes toward same-sex marriage have different effects in motivating individuals to turn out and to cast votes for Republican presidential candidates. Our results show that moral traditionalism, religiosity, favorable views toward Judeo-Christian religious groups, attitudes toward gay rights, affect toward gays and lesbians, and political ideology have a significant effect on support for same-sex marriage. With regards to vote choice, we find that support for same-sex marriage has a strong effect, where supporters of same-sex marriage are significantly less likely to support the Republican candidate. In addition, positive feelings toward gays and lesbians increase voter turnout, whereas, negative affect depresses turnout.

“Religiosity and the Pocketbook Over Time: A Long View on How Religion and Income Structure Partisan and Ideological Orientations.” With James C. Garand.

What role does religious commitment have in shaping partisan identification and ideological preferences? How do economic concerns influence these political identifiers? There is a clear disagreement over the role that moral and economic preferences play in structuring political outcomes, as well as the relative importance that the public assigns to religious and economic considerations. The purpose of this paper is to recast the current research on the role that moral and economic preferences have in structuring both partisan identification and political ideology. Because much of the debate is based on disagreements between both definitional and analytical ways to appropriately capture the effects of moral versus economic issues, we clarify the literature by recasting the clash between moral and economic preferences in terms of rote religiosity (church attendance) and personal economic well‐being (income). We find that the effect of church attendance on shaping partisan and ideological identification increases over time; on the other hand, income continues to have a significant but constant influence on partisanship and ideological preferences.