Survey Experiments

AJPS — 2026-07-23 Original Correcting measurement error bias in conjoint survey experiments Katherine Clayton, Yusaku Horiuchi, Aaron R. Kaufman, Gary King, Mayya Komisarchik Abstract Abstract Conjoint survey designs are spreading across the social sciences due to their unusual capacity to estimate many causal effects from a single randomized experiment. Unfortunately, by their ability to mirror complicated real‐world choices, these designs often generate substantial measurement error and thus bias. We replicate both the data collection and analysis from eight prominent conjoint studies, all of which closely reproduce published results, and reveal high levels of measurement error in all. We then discover a common empirical pattern in how measurement error appears in conjoint studies and, with it, introduce an easy‐to‐use statistical method to correct the bias. Along the way, we provide a much simpler and simultaneously more powerful approach to designing, organizing, understanding, and analyzing conjoint data analyses.

JCC — pp. 1-18 2026-07-16 Original Cultivated Memories and Selective Nationalism in China: Evidence on the United States and Russia Yu Liu, Tuo Chen Abstract Despite China’s similarly complex modern relationships with both the United States and Russia, contemporary Chinese public opinion is far more favorable toward Russia than toward the United States. Why? Combining observational analysis, survey experiments, and conventional regression, we argue that state regulation of collective memory about the two countries plays a key role in producing this selective nationalism. Using original data from two survey experiments in China, we show that exposure to more balanced historical information, rather than the one-sided narratives promoted by the state, reduces both anti-Americanism and pro-Russian sentiment. We also find that educational attainment, as a vehicle for political indoctrination, is associated with stronger anti-American and pro-Russian views. Our study highlights memory engineering as a powerful instrument of political misinformation.

JOP — 2026-07-06 Original Indirect Influence: How Elite Attacks on Information Providers Affect Public Opinion Formation Erik Peterson, Allison M.N. Archer, Kishan Bhakta, Sho Izumisawa

JPART — 2026-06-05 Original The power of compassion-seeking: how enforcement officers’ discursive strategies foster citizens’ cooperative responses under policy ambiguity

APSR — pp. 1-21 2026-04-24 Original New Evidence and Design Considerations for Repeated Measure Experiments in Survey Research DIANA JORDAN, TRENT OLLERENSHAW, ANDREW TREXLER Abstract We re-examine recent influential claims that repeated measure experimental designs offer large precision gains without biasing treatment effect estimates in survey research. We test these claims by experimentally varying the design of six classic political science experiments across three distinct large samples of U.S. adults (total $ N=\mathrm{13,163} $ ). In contrast to prior evidence, we observe consistent attenuation of treatment effects in repeated measure designs. However, we show in simulations that this average design effect is small enough, and the precision gains large enough, that we recommend repeated measure designs for broad application—though (large-N) post-only designs may be preferable when research priorities include estimating the precise magnitude of a treatment effect. We additionally explore how several design considerations affect the bias-precision trade-off, such as within-subject versus between-groups designs, the relative separation of repeated measures within single surveys, and differences in respondent characteristics across sample types.

JOP — 2026-04-14 Original Social Desirability Bias In Online Surveys: An Experimental Assessment Daniel Bischof, Tim Lars Allinger, Kristian Frederiksen, Morgan Le Corre Juratic

APSR — pp. 1-29 2026-03-24 Original Elite Partisan Disagreement and Military Victory: Evidence from South Korean Battle Experiments MICHAEL F. JOSEPH, JOON H. CHUNG, HUI SEONG PARK

APSR — pp. 1-19 2026-03-03 Original Partisan Expressive Responding: Lessons from Two Decades of Research MATTHEW H. GRAHAM Abstract Research on partisan expressive responding suggests that the beliefs people express in surveys are more partisan than their underlying perceptions. This article examines the scope and importance of expressive responding through a meta-reanalysis of 44 studies from 25 articles. On average, treatments designed to reduce expressive responding shrink measured partisan bias by about 25%. Across the 242 survey questions in the data, treatments increase the correlation between the average Democrat’s and Republican’s beliefs from 0.81 to 0.86. Contrary to expectations derived from the two leading theories of expressive responding, misreporting (“cheerleading”) and congenial inference, there is no evidence that expressive responding increases in partisan identity strength or educational attainment. As research on expressive responding enters its third decade, greater emphasis on design-based tests of mechanisms may help build a firmer understanding of the nature and substantive importance of expressive responding—namely, whether the forces that produce expressive responding in surveys also shape real-world political judgments.