Showing papers by "Arthur Lupia published in 2015"
TL;DR: A growing body of evidence suggests that transparency, openness, and reproducibility are vital features of science as discussed by the authors, and most scientists embrace these features as disciplinary norms and values when asked, therefore, one might expect that these valued features would be routine in daily practice.
Abstract: Transparency, openness, and reproducibility are readily recognized as vital features of science (1, 2). When asked, most scientists embrace these features as disciplinary norms and values (3). Therefore, one might expect that these valued features would be routine in daily practice. Yet, a growing body of evidence suggests that this is not the case (4–6).
1,576 citations
Book•
02 Nov 2015
157 citations
TL;DR: This article showed that repeated exposure to counter-stereotypical information is insufficient to reduce evaluative prejudice and instead, citizens must associate this prejudice with adverse effects for themselves in contexts that induce them to rethink their existing racial beliefs.
Abstract: Anti-black prejudice affects how some citizens evaluate black candidates. What does it take to reduce the role of prejudice in these evaluations? Using logical implications of relevant psychological phenomena, this article shows that repeated exposure to counter-stereotypical information is insufficient to reduce evaluative prejudice. Instead, citizens must associate this prejudice with adverse effects for themselves in contexts that induce them to rethink their existing racial beliefs. These findings explain important disagreements in empirical prejudice research, as only some empirical research designs supply the conditions for prejudice reduction predicted here. This study also clarifies why similarly situated citizens react so differently to counter-stereotypical information. In sum, we find that prejudice change is possible, but in a far narrower set of circumstances than many scholars claim.
19 citations
TL;DR: The American Political Science Association's Task Force on Public Engagement (APSA-PS) as discussed by the authors was created by the APSA Board of Trustees to evaluate current communication practices in political science and use lessons from research and practice to describe better ways forward.
Abstract: Political science is at a crossroads. Some people see political science as more valuable and influential than ever. Political scientists use an expanding set of methods to study a growing range of topics and to inform an increasingly diverse set of audiences about politics, policy, and government. Government agencies, nongovernmental organizations, and private enterprises seek political science data and analysis. Articles and books about political science enlighten teachers and students in classrooms throughout the country. Political science expertise is sought by people who want to make a difference in their community and by people who want to change the world. Others see political science differently—if they see it at all. Some politicians, for example, question the public value of a scientific approach to politics, policy, and government. Others question whether political science provides information that is distinct from media commentary. Many journalists who write about politics, in turn, do not view political science as informative to their endeavors. And for many citizens, the terms political and science used together constitute an oxymoron. For such people, the potential value of political science is not well-understood. The American Political Science Association’s (APSA) Task Force on Public Engagement works from the premise that political science has great and growing potential to provide substantial value to many people and organizations. We also contend that much of that potential value is untapped. Like many other scholarly disciplines, political science has adopted communicative norms, and developed professional incentives, that limit scholars’ abilities to effectively convey useful information to diverse audiences. Political science can improve lives but only if political scientists improve the way we convey their insights. This article describes the activities of the task force. The task force appraised current communication practices in political science and uses lessons from research and practice to describe better ways forward. This special issue of PS: Political Science and Politics includes a contribution from every member of the task force. The contributions include case studies, in-depth interviews, and a well-considered collection of new ways that individual scholars and professional organizations can convey their expertise in ways that are more meaningful, memorable, and actionable to more people. In this introduction, we diagnose our current situation and explain how it inhibits communicative effectiveness. We then offer 12 concrete proposals to improve public engagement. These proposals are drawn from the entirety of the task force’s efforts, and they represent consistent core themes of subsequent articles in this special issue. We conclude by introducing the task force members and briefly previewing their contributions to this collective endeavor.
9 citations