Research

Published Work

“Meet the Press: Gendered Conversational Norms in Televised Political Discussion,” with Jon Green, Kelsey Shoub, Jared Edgerton, Mallory Wagner, and Skyler Cranmer (Forthcoming, Journal of Politics)

Abstract: Televised political commentary offers a prominent venue for elites to interact with one another, modeling political talk for large numbers of viewers. When do televised discussions between political pundits reproduce or mitigate gender inequality? Extending prior work on descriptive representation and decision rules in formal deliberative settings, we examine the participatory consequences of gender composition and conversational norms on over 6,000 informal, panel-style discussions that aired on American television news between 2000 and 2017. We find that on “debate-style” programs that foster majoritarian conversational norms, women speak more and are shown greater respect as their share of the discussion group increases. These relationships are attenuated on shows with consensus-oriented conversational norms. Our findings highlight how certain features of political television programming—namely a lack of descriptive representation and a focus on conflict—may contribute to gender inequality, setting problematic behavioral norms for the public to emulate.

“Elusive consensus: Polarization in elite communication on the COVID-19 pandemic,” Science Advances, 2020, 6(28), with Jon Green, Jared Edgerton, Kelsey Shoub, and Skyler Cranmer

Abstract: Cues sent by political elites are known to influence public attitudes and behavior. Polarization in elite rhetoric may hinder effective responses to public health crises, when accurate information and rapid behavioral change can save lives. We examine polarization in cues sent to the public by current members of the U.S. House and Senate during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, measuring polarization as the ability to correctly classify the partisanship of tweets’ authors based solely on the text and the dates they were sent. We find that Democrats discussed the crisis more frequently–emphasizing threats to public health and American workers–while Republicans placed greater emphasis on China and businesses. Polarization in elite discussion of the COVID-19 pandemic peaked in mid-February—weeks after the first confirmed case in the United States—and continued into March. These divergent cues correspond with a partisan divide in the public’s early reaction to the crisis

Working Papers

“When Policing Mobilizes: Political Action in the Wake of Anti-Gang Crackdowns” (Job market paper)

Abstract: The presence and practices of the police vary substantially across place. Frequent and aggressive enforcement is often highly concentrated in specific neighborhoods, where officers are directed to preempt crime with tactics that generate large numbers of stops and arrests. How do these aggressive policies affect political behavior in the places they target? I exploit a policy that led to substantial within-neighborhood variation in the power and practices of the police, and show that residents reacted strongly to these changes. Beginning in the 1990s, a series of court-ordered injunctions against Los Angeles gangs established areas of the city where police powers were expanded, aggressive enforcement was encouraged, and the civil liberties of suspected gang members were severely curtailed. Drawing on a wide array of data sources, including aggregate and individual-level registration and turnout data, revealed preferences from ballot initiatives, and a panel survey, I find these harsh anti-gang crackdowns led to large increases in both electoral and non-electoral participation, particularly among Black, Latino, and young individuals. I find corresponding increases in support for criminal justice reform and self-reported discriminatory encounters with the police, consistent with claims that gang injunctions led to widespread racial profiling. Together, these findings suggest that concentrated anti-crime measures can have substantial electoral effects that extend far beyond those who are directly stopped and questioned by the police.

“What Randomized Policing Experiments Can Teach Us About the Political Effects of Policing”

Abstract: A growing body of research suggests that proximal contact with aggressive policing can have important consequences for political attitudes and behavior, particularly in poor communities of color. Yet the direction, magnitude, and mechanisms behind these effects are unclear. I leverage exogenous changes in police presence, training, and tactics induced by a three arm, randomized policing experiment conducted in hotspots of violent crime to identify the conditions under which law enforcement activity affects electoral turnout. Pairing geocoded voter files with the locations of the intervention sites, I find that sudden, localized increases in police patrols increased voter turnout among Black voters regardless of the type of intervention used—while residents of some hotspots were exposed to dramatic increases in investigatory stops and enforcement actions, others were exposed to policing aimed at addressing the “root causes” of violent crime through community outreach and improved access to social services. Importantly, these mobilizing effects are only seen in local elections where officials responsible for setting local policing policy were on the ballot. I discuss the implications of these findings and the possible role of the salience of crime in driving these electoral effects.

In Progress

“Pork on the Menu: Local Elections and Inequality in the Provision of Public Goods”

“Seeing Politics: A Guide to Computer Vision in Political Science” (with Skyler Cranmer)