Research

Published Work

“Meet the Press: Gendered Conversational Norms in Televised Political Discussion,” Journal of Politics, 2025, 87(3), with Jon Green, Kelsey Shoub, Jared Edgerton, Mallory Wagner, and Skyler Cranmer

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

“The Mobilizing Effects of Aggressive Policing: Evidence from Anti-Gang Crackdowns”

Abstract: Aggressive, zero tolerance policing exposes many Americans to high levels of police surveillance and coercion. Yet little is known about how these tactics affect voting in the broader communities they target. I overcome difficulties in identifying the causal effect of aggressive policing on turnout by exploiting hyperlocal variation in exposure to a series of geographically targeted, anti-gang crackdowns in Los Angeles. Using administrative data on voting, a geocoded panel survey, and a within-neighborhoods, difference-in-difference design, I show that these crackdowns led to large, durable increases in political participation. These mobilization effects are concentrated among Black and Latino residents, who became significantly more likely to report police discrimination. I find corresponding increases in support for criminal justice reform, but minimal changes to perceived crime and safety. These results suggest that communities targeted by harsh police crackdowns may mobilize to resist these policies when viewed as ineffective and racially targeted.

“Can Policing Increase Participation? Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment” (Job Market Paper)

Abstract: Existing scholarship documents the ways in which involuntary contact with police can harm and demobilize the public, but policing can also provide important benefits in the form of reassurance and crime control. Because of this, the aggregate consequences of high levels of policing are unclear. To test the effects of policing on turnout, I leverage a unique field experiment in which the presence of the police and the tactics they used were randomized. Some neighborhoods experienced high-intensity patrols that generated large numbers of stops and arrests; others experienced patrols that emphasized non-enforcement, community-oriented tactics; while others experienced no changes in policing. I find that both interventions increased turnout in subsequent elections by roughly 3 percentage points despite large differences in officer behavior. These findings offer the strongest evidence to date that increasing the presence of the police in neighborhoods with high crime rates can generate positive feedback effects that encourage voting.

In Progress

“Criminal Justice and Voter Behavior in Local Elections,” with Justin de Benedictis-Kessner, John Sides, and Christopher Warshaw

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

“When Do Unions Hinder Reform? A Comprehensive Investigation of Police Collective Bargaining Agreements”