Civilian national service programs can powerfully increase youth voter turnout.

Low rates of youth voting are a feature of contemporary democracies the world over, with the United States having some of the lowest youth turnout rates in the world. However, far too little is known about how to address the dismal rates of youth voter participation found in many advanced democracies. In this paper, we examine the causal effect of a potentially scalable solution that has attracted renewed interest today: voluntary national service programs targeted at the youth civilian population. Leveraging the large pool of young people who apply each year to participate in the Teach For America (TFA) program-a prominent voluntary national service organization in the United States that integrates college graduates into teaching roles in low-income communities for 2 y-we examine the effect of service participation on voter turnout. To do so, we match TFA administrative records to large-scale nationwide voter files and employ a fuzzy regression discontinuity design around the recommended admittance cutoff for the TFA program. We find that serving as a teacher in the Teach For America national service program has a large effect on civic participation-substantially increasing voter turnout rates among applicants admitted to the program. This effect is noticeably larger than that of previous efforts to increase youth turnout. Our results suggest that civilian national service programs targeted at young people have great promise in helping to narrow the stubborn and enduring political engagement gap between younger and older citizens.

Are Americans less likely to reply to emails from Black people relative to White people?

In this article, we present the results from a large-scale field experiment designed to measure racial discrimination among the American public. We conducted an audit study on the general public-sending correspondence to 250,000 citizens randomly drawn from public voter registration lists. Our within-subjects experimental design tested the public's responsiveness to electronically delivered requests to volunteer their time to help with completing a simple task-taking a survey. We randomized whether the request came from either an ostensibly Black or an ostensibly White sender. We provide evidence that in electronic interactions, on average, the public is less likely to respond to emails from people they believe to be Black (rather than White). Our results give us a snapshot of a subtle form of racial bias that is systemic in the United States. What we term everyday or "paper cut" discrimination is exhibited by all racial/ethnic subgroups-outside of Black people themselves-and is present in all geographic regions in the United States. We benchmark paper cut discrimination among the public to estimates of discrimination among various groups of social elites. We show that discrimination among the public occurs more frequently than discrimination observed among elected officials and discrimination in higher education and the medical sector but simultaneously, less frequently than discrimination in housing and employment contexts. Our results provide a window into the discrimination that Black people in the United States face in day-to-day interactions with their fellow citizens.

Promoting Voter Turnout: an Unanticipated Impact of Early-Childhood Preventive Interventions.

Preventive interventions in early childhood have a range of behavioral and health effects. However, there is an emerging literature extending this work to include acts of civic engagement, such as voting. Given that America has one of the lowest and most disparate rates of voter turnout in the world-and most of the current efforts aimed at boosting voter turnout and making the electorate more representative of the general public are proximal to the voting experience-there is a need for a better understanding of the potential long-term impact of early-childhood programming on civic engagement in adulthood. This paper builds on theories of political socialization and prior research demonstrating significant impacts of the Fast Track preventive intervention on voter turnout to examine the extent to which there are positive impacts on voter participation for other evidence-based preventive interventions targeting children's social and emotional capacities. Specifically, we leveraged data from a randomized controlled trial of the classroom-centered (CC) and the family school partnership (FSP) preventive interventions delivered in first grade. We analyzed data from approximately 700 urban, predominately African American, public school students who were randomly assigned to classrooms that either implemented (1) the classroom-centered intervention (which included the good behavior game), (2) the FSP intervention, or (3) the business as usual (i.e., control group). Data from the trial were combined with archival voter data when the youth were in their early 30s. Analyses demonstrated positive impacts of the CC preventive intervention on voter turnout more than two decades after exposure to the prevention program. Taken together, these findings provide additional evidence that some of the attributes that promote active participation in democracy can be fostered in early childhood-long before most interventions that have previously tried, and often failed, to increase voter turnout.

Validated names for experimental studies on race and ethnicity.

A large and fast-growing number of studies across the social sciences use experiments to better understand the role of race in human interactions, particularly in the American context. Researchers often use names to signal the race of individuals portrayed in these experiments. However, those names might also signal other attributes, such as socioeconomic status (e.g., education and income) and citizenship. If they do, researchers would benefit greatly from pre-tested names with data on perceptions of these attributes; such data would permit researchers to draw correct inferences about the causal effect of race in their experiments. In this paper, we provide the largest dataset of validated name perceptions to date based on three different surveys conducted in the United States. In total, our data include over 44,170 name evaluations from 4,026 respondents for 600 names. In addition to respondent perceptions of race, income, education, and citizenship from names, our data also include respondent characteristics. Our data will be broadly helpful for researchers conducting experiments on the manifold ways in which race shapes American life.

Public mass shootings cause large surges in Americans' engagement with gun policy.

As public mass shootings continue to plague the United States, a growing scholarly literature seeks to understand the political effects of these tragic events. This literature, however, focuses on public opinion or turnout and vote choice, leaving open to question whether or not public mass shootings affect a range of other important actions citizens may take to engage with gun policy. Leveraging the as-good-as random timing of high-publicity public mass shootings over the past decade and an immense array of publicly available and proprietary data, we demonstrate that these events consistently cause surges in public engagement with gun policy-including internet searches, streaming documentaries, discussion on social media, signing petitions, and donating to political action committees. Importantly, we document the behaviors where shootings induce polarizing upswings in engagement and those where upswings skew toward gun control. Finally, we demonstrate that low-publicity shootings largely exert little-to-no effect on our outcomes.

400 million voting records show profound racial and geographic disparities in voter turnout in the United States.

One of the core tenets of a well-functioning representative democracy is that the people who vote to elect government officials are representative of the public. Here we reinforce the idea that reality is far from this lofty ideal. We document the extent and nature of inequities in voter participation in the United States with a level of granularity and precision that previous research has not afforded. To do so, we use a unique nationwide dataset of approximately 400 million validated voting records across multiple election cycles. With this novel dataset, we document large and persistent gaps in voter turnout by race, age, and political affiliation. Minority citizens, young people, and those who support the Democratic Party are much less likely to vote than whites, older citizens, and Republican Party supporters. Minorities, youth, and democrats are also much more likely to live in local communities where fewer individuals vote-areas that we term turnout deserts. Turnout deserts are especially pernicious given that they are self-reinforcing-bolstered by the social dynamics that fundamentally shape citizens' voting patterns. Our results show just how glaring inequities in political participation are in the US. These patterns threaten the very fabric of our democracy and fundamentally shift the balance of political power in the halls of government towards the interests of whites, older citizens, and republicans. They illustrate that participation in the United States is strikingly unequal-far from the ideals that this country has long aspired to.

Patient traits shape health-care stakeholders' choices on how to best allocate life-saving care.

During global pandemics, health-care decision makers often face critical shortages of life-saving medical equipment. How do medical stakeholders prioritize which patients are most deserving of scarce treatment? We report the results of three conjoint experiments conducted in the United States in 2020, testing for biases in US physicians', citizens' and elected politicians' preferences for scarce ventilator distribution. We found that all stakeholders prioritized younger patients and patients who had a higher probability of surviving with ventilator access. When patients' survivability was tied, physicians prioritized patients from racial/ethnic minorities (that is, Asian, Black and Hispanic patients) over all-else-equal white patients, religious minorities (that is, Muslim patients) over religious majority group members (that is, Catholic patients) and patients of lower socio-economic status over wealthier patients. The public also prioritized Black and Hispanic patients over white patients but were biased against religious minorities (that is, Atheist and Muslim patients) relative to religious majority group members. Elected politicians were also biased against Atheist patients. Our effects varied by political party-with Republican physicians, politicians and members of the public showing bias against religious minority patients and Democratic physicians showing preferential treatment of racial and religious minorities. Our results suggest that health-care stakeholders' personal biases impact decisions on who deserves life-saving medical equipment.

The participatory and partisan impacts of mandatory vote-by-mail.

Recently, mandatory vote-by-mail has received a great deal of attention as a means of administering elections in the United States. However, policy-makers disagree on the merits of this approach. Many of these debates hinge on whether mandatory vote-by-mail advantages one political party over the other. Using a unique pairing of historical county-level data that covers the past three decades and more than 40 million voting records from the two states that have conducted a staggered rollout of mandatory vote-by-mail (Washington and Utah), we use several methods for causal inference to show that mandatory vote-by-mail slightly increases voter turnout but has no effect on election outcomes at various levels of government. Our results find meaning given contemporary debates about the merits of mandatory vote-by-mail. Mandatory vote-by-mail ensures that citizens are given a safe means of casting their ballot while simultaneously not advantaging one political party over the other.

There is no liberal media bias in which news stories political journalists choose to cover.

Is the media biased against conservatives? Although a dominant majority of journalists identify as liberals/Democrats and many Americans and public officials frequently decry supposedly high and increasing levels of media bias, little compelling evidence exists as to (i) the ideological or partisan leanings of the many journalists who fail to answer surveys and/or identify as independents and (ii) whether journalists' political leanings bleed into the choice of which stories to cover that Americans ultimately consume. Using a unique combination of a large-scale survey of political journalists, data from journalists' Twitter networks, election returns, a large-scale correspondence experiment, and a conjoint survey experiment, we show definitively that the media exhibits no bias against conservatives (or liberals for that matter) in what news that they choose to cover. This shows that journalists' individual ideological leanings have unexpectedly little effect on the vitally important, but, up to this point, unexplored, early stage of political news generation.

Author Correction: Insufficient sleep reduces voting and other prosocial behaviours.

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via a link at the top of the paper.

Insufficient sleep reduces voting and other prosocial behaviours.

Insufficient sleep is a growing public health concern in industrial societies. Although a lack of sleep is known to negatively affect private behaviours-such as working or going to school-comparatively little is known about its consequences for the social behaviours that hold society and democracy together. Using three complementary methods, we show how insufficient sleep affects various measures of civic participation. With survey data from two countries, we show that insufficient sleep predicts lower voter turnout. Next, with a geographical regression discontinuity design, we demonstrate that individuals from the United States who tend to sleep less due to circadian impacts of time-zone boundaries are also less likely to vote. Finally, we experimentally manipulate short-term sleep over a two-stage study. We observe that the treatment decreases the levels of civic engagement, as shown by their willingness to vote, sign petitions and donate to charities. These results highlight the strong negative consequences that current levels of insufficient sleep have on vitally important measures of social capital.