IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsoctx/v11y2021i3p113-d638676.html

Seeking Evidence of The MAGA Cult and Trump Derangement Syndrome: An Examination of (A)symmetric Political Bias

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew S. Franks

    (Psychology, Liberal Arts and Social Sciences, Researcher, Central Michigan University, Mount Pleasant, MI 48859, USA
    Social, Behavioral and Human Sciences, Interdisciplinary Arts and Sciences, Faculty, University of Washington Tacoma, Tacoma, WA 98402, USA)

  • Farhang Hesami

    (Psychology, Social Sciences, Alumnus, Pacific Lutheran University, Tacoma, WA 98447, USA)

Abstract

Three studies sought to explore the existence of (a)symmetric bias regarding Donald Trump. In Study 1, participants read one of three statements expressing different degrees of favorability toward electing the President of the United States via a National Popular Vote attributed to Trump or an anonymous source. In Study 2, participants read one of two statements either favoring or disfavoring the name change of the Washington NFL franchise, and the statement was attributed to either Trump or an anonymous source. In Study 3, Trump and Biden voters were asked to rate their support or opposition to counting all the votes in battleground states when continued counting was expected to either help Trump or Biden. Results for all three studies supported the asymmetric bias hypothesis. Trump supporters consistently showed bias in favor of the interests and ostensible positions of Trump, whereas Trump’s detractors did not show an opposing bias.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew S. Franks & Farhang Hesami, 2021. "Seeking Evidence of The MAGA Cult and Trump Derangement Syndrome: An Examination of (A)symmetric Political Bias," Societies, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-17, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsoctx:v:11:y:2021:i:3:p:113-:d:638676
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/11/3/113/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/11/3/113/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gordon Pennycook & James Allan Cheyne & Nathaniel Barr & Derek J. Koehler & Jonathan A. Fugelsang, 2015. "On the reception and detection of pseudo-profound bullshit," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 10(6), pages 549-563, November.
    2. David Stromberg, 2008. "How the Electoral College Influences Campaigns and Policy: The Probability of Being Florida," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(3), pages 769-807, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hungerman, Daniel & Rinz, Kevin & Weninger, Tim & Yoon, Chungeun, 2018. "Political campaigns and church contributions," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 403-426.
    2. Kaisheng Lai & Yingxin Yang & Yuxiang Na & Haixia Wang, 2022. "The Relationship between Bullshit Receptivity and Willingness to Share Misinformation about Climate Change: The Moderating Role of Pregnancy," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1-14, December.
    3. Casas, Agustin, 2020. "The electoral benefits of unemployment, clientelism and distributive politics," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    4. Bernecker, Andreas, 2014. "Do politicians shirk when reelection is certain? Evidence from the German parliament," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 55-70.
    5. Anthony Evans & Willem Sleegers & Žan Mlakar, 2020. "Individual differences in receptivity to scientific bullshit," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(3), pages 401-412, May.
    6. Gordon Pennycook & Robert M Ross & Derek J Koehler & Jonathan A Fugelsang, 2016. "Atheists and Agnostics Are More Reflective than Religious Believers: Four Empirical Studies and a Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(4), pages 1-18, April.
    7. Subhasish Chowdhury & Dan Kovenock & Roman Sheremeta, 2013. "An experimental investigation of Colonel Blotto games," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 52(3), pages 833-861, April.
    8. M. Roth, 2011. "Resource allocation and voter calculus in a multicandidate election," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 148(3), pages 337-351, September.
    9. Emma Neybert & Donald R Gaffney & Liang Shen & Stephanie Flout & Maxwell Richards & Frank Kardes & Sarah Elizabeth Perry & Zoey Phelps, 2020. "Novel Moderators of the Reception and Detection of Pseudo-Profound Bullshit," Post-Print hal-05385269, HAL.
    10. Alexander C. Walker & Martin Harry Turpin & Jennifer A. Stolz & Jonathan A. Fugelsang & Derek J. Koehler, 2019. "Finding meaning in the clouds: Illusory pattern perception predicts receptivity to pseudo-profound bullshit," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 14(2), pages 109-119, March.
    11. Theiss Bendixen, 2020. "How cultural evolution can inform the science of science communication—and vice versa," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-10, December.
    12. Gordon Pennycook & James Allan Cheyne & Derek J. Koehler & Jonathan A. Fugelsang, 2020. "On the belief that beliefs should change according to evidence: Implications for conspiratorial, moral, paranormal, political, religious, and science beliefs," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(4), pages 476-498, July.
    13. Ali, Amin Masud & Savoia, Antonio, 2023. "Decentralisation or patronage: What determines government's allocation of development spending in a unitary country? Evidence from Bangladesh," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    14. Christian Cox, 2023. "Lobbying for government appropriations," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 54(3), pages 443-483, September.
    15. Galasso, Vincenzo & Nannicini, Tommaso, 2011. "Competing on Good Politicians," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 105(1), pages 79-99, February.
    16. Sebastián Morales & Charles Thraves, 2021. "On the Resource Allocation for Political Campaigns," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(11), pages 4140-4159, November.
    17. Tyler Kustra, 2022. "Sanctioning the Homeland: Diasporas’ Influence on American Economic Sanctions Policy," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 66(3), pages 443-472, April.
    18. Albert Solé-Ollé, 2013. "Inter-regional redistribution through infrastructure investment: tactical or programmatic?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 156(1), pages 229-252, July.
    19. Cazor Katz, Andre & Acuña, Hector & Carrasco, Diego & Carrasco, Martín, 2017. "Transferencias como Canal de Ventaja Electoral: El Caso de Chile [Discretionary Government Transfers to Catch Votes: The Case of Chile]," MPRA Paper 83668, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Giandomenico Domenico & Annamaria Tuan & Marco Visentin, 2021. "Linguistic drivers of misinformation diffusion on social media during the COVID-19 pandemic," Italian Journal of Marketing, Springer, vol. 2021(4), pages 351-369, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsoctx:v:11:y:2021:i:3:p:113-:d:638676. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.