Pierce Ekstrom
LightNews LightNews
banner
pierceekstrom.bsky.social
Pierce Ekstrom
@pierceekstrom.bsky.social
500 followers 200 following 31 posts
Asst prof at University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Former postdoc at Wash U and UMN grad student. Political Psychologist. Studies morality, group ID, conflict, polarization.

http://pierceekstrom.com
Posts Replies Media Videos
pierceekstrom.bsky.social
Here’s the figure from the more representative study. Interaction wasn’t significant, but you can see each treatment made some difference on its own, but they didn’t add together nicely. We think both made violations more salient.
A bar graph showing approval and willingness to vote for senators engaged in undemocratic behavior. Bars vary across four combinations of two manipulations: 1) democratic principles reported before vs. after judgments of the politician and 2) Low-Salience vs. High-Salience undemocratic behavior. Approval for senators engaged in undemocratic behavior was consistently low (at or below 2.5 on a 5-point scale) across conditions (but was highest in the condition where violations were not made salient and judged before participants reported their democratic principles). Willingness to vote for the undemocratic senator was consistently at or above 4 on a 7-point scale, but again, was highest in the condition where violations were not made salient and judged before participants reported their democratic principles
May 20, 2025 at 3:02 PM