Personalism or party platform? Gender quotas and women's representation under different electoral system orientations.

Underrepresentation of women in politics is a matter of great concern to social scientists, citizens, and policymakers alike. Despite effort over the past decade to ameliorate it with gender quotas of different types, scientific research provides a mixed picture on the extent to which quotas can close these gender gaps under different conditions. We approach this puzzle by focusing on the orientation of electoral systems-candidate-centered vs. platform-centered-as a context that conditions the effect of quotas on representation. Our analyses of 76 countries' electoral rules and legislatures show that contrary to expectations, it is in candidate-oriented systems that quotas facilitate stronger effect on women's representation. Even after considering proportional representation, district magnitude, human development, or labor-force participation as alternative explanations, we show that quotas foster greater increases in gender representation in candidate-oriented systems. The broader implications are that in electoral systems that tend to have larger gender gaps, quotas have a substantial contribution to equal representation.

Cross-national evidence of a negativity bias in psychophysiological reactions to news.

What accounts for the prevalence of negative news content? One answer may lie in the tendency for humans to react more strongly to negative than positive information. "Negativity biases" in human cognition and behavior are well documented, but existing research is based on small Anglo-American samples and stimuli that are only tangentially related to our political world. This work accordingly reports results from a 17-country, 6-continent experimental study examining psychophysiological reactions to real video news content. Results offer the most comprehensive cross-national demonstration of negativity biases to date, but they also serve to highlight considerable individual-level variation in responsiveness to news content. Insofar as our results make clear the pervasiveness of negativity biases on average, they help account for the tendency for audience-seeking news around the world to be predominantly negative. Insofar as our results highlight individual-level variation, however, they highlight the potential for more positive content, and suggest that there may be reason to reconsider the conventional journalistic wisdom that "if it bleeds, it leads."

Reason within passion: values as motivational anchors of Israeli opinion on the 2006 Lebanon war and ceasefire.

The relationship between core values and political opinions has been well documented but its implications for citizens' awareness of the reasons that ground competing opinions are less well understood. This study examines the effect of value priorities on rating different rationales for a government decision to end a war. The relationship is tested among Israelis in the days following the aftermath of the 2006 Israel-Hezbollah war in Lebanon. Consistent with previous research, values, such as universalism, predicted dovish or hawkish positions on the ceasefire. In addition, however, different value priorities correlated, as expected, with their respective rationales for an opinion on the ceasefire. Moreover, both supporters and opponents evaluated valid (versus invalid) reasons as more important, regardless of their personal position. Overall findings suggest that, even in conflict, reasoned considerations resonate with the opinions of ordinary citizens.