Dr. Samantha Mosier presents her research (co-authored with Megan Ruxton), “Trust Issues: U.S. Public Preferences for Entities to Protect the Environment,” at the American Political Science Association Annual Meeting in  Washington (Sept 2019).

Abstract: “This paper examines which institutions and entities the U.S. general public trusts to protect the environment. Using data from the Natural Marketing Institute 2016 LOHAS survey, we evaluate which institutions and entities are identified by 1,022 respondents as trustworthy to protect the environment (broadly defined). The results suggest there is not a singular institution or entity that is overwhelmingly trusted by the public to protect the environment. Indeed, a significant portion of the population (25%) trusts no one to protect the environment. Level of education is the most consistent explanatory factor for what influences trust. Higher educational achievement is associated with lower levels of trust. Additional, race and regional location also provide keen insights for variation in trust levels.”

This spring Dr. Jonathan Morris presented a paper titled “More Guns, Fewer Shootings? Public Opinion on Mass Shooting Prevention in America,” at the Annual Meeting of the Western Political Science Association, in San Diego. The paper was co-authored with his brother, David Morris, whose PhD is in sociology.

Abstract: “There is a relative dearth of academic work on the public’s perception of arming school teachers, as most existing studies look at opinion on gun control. The purpose of this study is to investigate public opinion on arming school teachers as a solution to curb mass shootings in America. Our main research question asks: What factors contribute to the belief that arming school teachers will cause a decrease in mass shootings? We also ask: What factors contribute to the overall belief that increasing access to guns among law-abiding citizens will decrease mass shootings in America? Using data survey data collected in June 2018, which was shortly following the mass shootings in Las Vegas and Parkland, we investigate these questions in effort to provide a clearer understanding of the belief that more firearms will ultimately reduce the threats of mass shootings.”

Dr. Peter Francia presented his latest research paper, “The Paranoid Style and the Rise of Fake News in American Politics,” at the 2019 American Political Science Association’s annual conference in Washington, DC.

Abstract: In 1964, historian Richard Hofstadter authored the seminal text, The Paranoid Style in American Politics. Fifty-five years later in an era now littered with “fake news” websites and conspiracy theories that can spread rapidly over the Internet, Hofstadter’s investigation into “the politics of the irrational” warrants revisiting.

In this paper, I draw on the concept of the “paranoid style” originally developed by Hofstadter, but with a quantitative twist. Psychologists Allan Fenigstein and Peter Vanable (1992) developed a now widely used survey instrument to assess paranoid thought. Using data from an original nationwide and demographically representative survey of more than 800 adults that combines the Fenigstein and Vanable paranoia instrument with questions about popular present-day political conspiracies and well-publicized fake news stories, my research asks the question: Is there a relationship between paranoia and one’s willingness to accept or deny established political facts?

Drawing on Hofstadter’s earlier work about the “paranoid style,” I hypothesize that in today’s sometimes confusing information environment, which includes both credible and fake news, paranoia plays a significant role in understanding why some Americans are more susceptible than others to believing misinformation popularized through fake news websites. The results of this research confirm my expectations and raise potentially serious implications for democratic theory, which holds that an informed citizenry is necessary for elections and government to function properly. By examining the theory of the “paranoid style” in today’s modern context, this research offers potentially useful insights into better understanding why some people are better able to differentiate facts from fiction in the political arena. These results have clear and obvious implications for the future of American democracy.

Francia also served as a discussant on the panel, “Budgets and Attitudes Toward Economic Policy,” and as a panelist for the “Author Meets Critics” roundtable, “Who Donates in Campaigns.”

Recently published research from our own Hanna Kassab: “Military Intervention and the Destabilization of Target States” Journal of Studies and Applied Research on Third Sector, vol, 2 no, 2, (2019): 19-35 (with Kaitlyn Rose).

ABSTRACT: This article examines the use of foreign military intervention (FMI) through the international relations theory of liberalism. As intra-state conflict is becoming increasingly transnational in nature, FMI has become a powerful foreign policy tool in the post-Cold War era. Often, the use of military intervention is aimed to promote liberal democracy and humanitarian values. This often requires a dynamic change to the target state’s centralized power structure. In turn, this transfer of power has repeatedly allowed for long-standing power vacuums to emerge. This article uses a qualitative approach when examining the cases of Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria to provide a more encompassing detail of the intended and unintended consequences of FMI, as well as prospects for the future of these nations, all of which have been plagued by civil strife, violence, and human rights violations in recent years.

Congratulations Hanna!

Dr. Jonathan Morris, with Dr. Jody Baumgartner and Robert Lichter, recently published “Negative News and Late-night Comedy about Presidential Candidates” in HUMOR. 

Abstract: “In this paper we explore the creation of jokes told on late night talk shows targeted at major party nominees for president from 1992–2008. We hypothesize that the number of jokes told about candidates are related to variations in polling numbers, mainstream media coverage, and party identification of the candidates. Our results show a positive relationship between the number of jokes told at a candidate’s expense and the amount of negative news coverage about the candidate. In addition, we find that Republicans are targeted with more frequency than Democrats. Results suggest that favorability ratings and whether or not a presidential candidate is an incumbent has no effect on the number of jokes targeting a candidate.

See https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/humr.2019.32.issue-4/humor-2018-0067/humor-2018-0067.xml.

Dr. Samantha Mosier has a new article published in Politics in the Life Sciences titled “Policies as species: Viewing and classifying policy from an evolutionary biology perspective.”

“This article proposes equating policies as species to develop a better understanding of how policies emerge, change, and diffuse across policymaking environments. Scholars have long shown an interest in understanding policy change and reinvention, whether incremental or nonincremental. The two subfields of public policy that can answer how and why policies change are not unified, leading to difficulty in comprehensively assessing policy emergence and change. The policy species concept bridges knowledge of the policy process and knowledge in the policy process by creating an operationalized definition of public policy and suggesting a process for classifying policies to observe subsequent behavior. Drawing from the field of biology, the policy species framework outlines how policies possess genotypes and phenotypes, which dictate what a policy is and how it can change. In tracing genotypic and phenetic change over time, policy evolution and change is more easily discernible. In turn, a more precise picture of how policies function is painted.”

See https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/politics-and-the-life-sciences/article/policies-as-species/7BF1B832C6BB839BC3C6FD5C65581288.

The Center for Survey Research issued a survey report for the July 4^th holiday entitled, “More Than Money: Happiness in the United States 243 Years After Independence.” The report generated media attention on television, radio, and in several newspapers. I appeared on the radio program, “Talk of the Town,” to discuss the results of the report. I also was a guest on radio with Patrick Johnson of WTEM in July to discuss the CSR’s findings on public opinion in North Carolina towards sports gambling legalization and the legalization of recreational marijuana use.

Below are links to some of the coverage the report received:

• (1) Yahoo! Finance (national): https://finance.yahoo.com/news/majority-americans-happy-says-ecu-160800575.html
• (2) WITN TV: https://www.witn.com/content/news/ECU-survey-finds-majority-of-Americans-are-happy-512075711.html
• (3) WNCT TV: https://www.wnct.com/local-news/new-survey-by-ecu-finds-most-americans-say-they-are-happy-in-general/
• (4) Talk of the Town (103.7 FM radio): https://soundcloud.com/innerbanksmedia/talk-of-the-town-7-2-2019-mike-lyons-dr-peter-francia
• (5) The Daily Reflector (newspaper): http://www.reflector.com/News/2019/07/05/Celebrants-find-reason-to-be-happy-on-Fourth.html
• (6) Small newspapers around the country: https://www.thewashingtondailynews.com/2019/07/01/majority-of-americans-happy-says-new-ecu-survey/; https://www.citizentribune.com/news/business/majority-of-americans-happy-says-new-ecu-survey/article_83121cc3-2b8b-591d-af90-80dc845d55c1.html

The latest report from the Life, Liberty and Happiness Project reveals that 78% of Americans agree with the statement, “I am happy in general.” As expected, one’s household financial situation is related to one’s happiness, but the survey shows other factors affect happiness such as approval of President Donald Trump’s job performance, whether one is proud to be an American, and attitudes regarding hard work and success.

Among the findings:

• Those who rate their household’s financial situation as good or excellent are more likely to report being happy than those who rate their household financial situation as fair, poor or very poor: 92% to 67%.
• Whether a person is proud to be an American also is related to happiness, even among citizens who rate their finances as fair to very poor. Among those, 70% report being happy if they are proud to be an American compared to 56% who say they are happy and do not report that they are proud to be an American.
• Approval of Trump’s job performance is associated with happiness even for those in fair to very poor financial situations, with 81% who report being happy if they approve of how Trump is doing as president. The number fell to 60% for those who disapprove of the president’s job performance.
• Among the less financially well-off, 77% report being happy if they believe that most people can succeed if they are willing to work hard. Only 53% are happy if they believe that hard work is no guarantee of success.

For more, see: https://news.ecu.edu/2019/07/01/life-liberty-and-happiness-2/

East Carolina University’s Thomas Harriot College of Arts and Sciences Staff Council hosted its third annual Staff Awards and Recognition Ceremony in the Main Campus Student Center on May 13. The event honors all THCAS staff members and recognizes the hard work they engage in on a day-to-day basis.

The council awarded DOPS’ Chatsidy Clarke with a Professional Development Grant. The awards acknowledge administrative or technical staff within the college who show exemplary professionalism and go above and beyond the requirements of their position, while the grant is awarded to a person who is actively pursuing career advancement within his or her field.

Clarke (pictured, middle, below), lead administrative support associate in the Department of Political Science since February 2016, noted, “I feel honored to have the support of the college for my professional endeavors… Having both the department and college recognize me for my efforts reinforces my confidence in my skills and potential.”

As recipient of the grant, Clarke will use her $1,200 award to attend the BRIDGES program at UNC-Chapel Hill.

“The BRIDGES program is full of prestigious women whom I would love to learn from and gain connections,” said Clarke. “My growth as an administrative professional will be strengthened by the skills obtained by this inclusive network. Through the program, I hope to gain leadership skills that will assist me as I advance my career in higher education administration.”

Social Science Quarterly recently announced that Drs. Baumgartner & Lockerbie’s “Maybe it Is More Than a Joke: Satire, Mobilization, and Political Participation” was one of the journal’s top 20 downloaded articles for the year 2018. The article can be downloaded for free until July at: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ssqu.12501#.