Political Attitudes

JOP 88/3 pp. 1082-1097 2026-07-01 Original Race, Diversity, and the Development of Political Attitudes on College Campuses Nathan K. Chan, Tanika Raychaudhuri Abstract （原文未提供摘要） 中文 种族、多样性与大学校园政治态度的发展 Nathan K. Chan, Tanika Raychaudhuri

JOP — 2026-06-16 Original The Effects of Religious Communication on Gendered Political Attitudes: Experimental Evidence from Colombia Radha Sarkar, Ana Sofia Elverdin, Sebastian Lucek

APSR — pp. 1-22 2026-06-10 Original The Effects of Religious Messages and Endorsements on Political Attitudes: A Meta-Reanalysis RADHA SARKAR, ALEXANDER COPPOCK Abstract The experimental study of the effects of religious messages and endorsements by religious leaders on political attitudes has a relatively short history yet has coalesced around three main claims: religious treatments are especially effective because of their religious character, effects are larger for religious affiliates than nonaffiliates, and effects are larger for high religiosity types than low religiosity types. Here, we meta-reanalyze the experimental record (58 treatment-outcome pairs drawn from 43 studies reported in 26 papers) to probe the generalizability of these claims. Our findings indicate that these three headline claims do not generalize straightforwardly across contexts: effects are large in some cases and close to zero in others, and we find no evidence in favor of the claimed heterogeneities by religious affiliation or religiosity. Based on a census of the estimands in this literature, we offer suggestions for future research that would enhance commensurability and synthesis.

PSJ — 2026-04-26 Original Partisanship, Deservingness, and the Attitudinal Policy Feedback Process for Social Policy Chris Faricy, Christopher Ellis Abstract ABSTRACT In an era of identity‐based partisan polarization, we examine whether social policies can still generate positive attitudinal feedback among beneficiaries. Drawing on nationally representative survey data, we demonstrate that partisanship conditions the policy feedback process through divergent perceptions of group deservingness. Democrats attribute economic vulnerability to systemic injustice and view policy beneficiaries as hardworking and sympathetic, while Republicans attribute poverty to individual failings and view beneficiaries more negatively. We show that Democrats evaluate both policy beneficiaries and taxpayers favorably, whereas Republicans sharply differentiate between these groups, viewing themselves as “makers” contributing to a system that benefits undeserving “takers.” These differences shape emotional responses to program use with Democrats reporting positive feelings about using social policies, while Republicans express more negative emotions. Even after controlling for actual policy usage and demographics, partisan gaps in attitudes toward social programs persist across diverse policy types. Experimental evidence reveals that partisan framing affects non‐users more than beneficiaries, with Democrats more responsive to group‐based cues. Our findings suggest that in American politics, partisan identities serve as powerful interpretive filters that prevent similar policy experiences from generating widespread positive political attitudes, thereby challenging the assumption that policies create new politics.