IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bof/bofitp/2016_009.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Elections, protest and trust in government: A natural experiment from Russia

Author

Listed:
  • Frye, Timothy
  • Borisova, Ekaterina

Abstract

How do flawed elections and post-election protest shape political attitudes? Taking advantage of the largely exogenous variation in the timing of a survey conducted in Moscow, we examine the short-term impact of the parliamentary election of December 4th, and the large protest of December 10th on trust in the Russian government. The fraud-marred parliamentary election had little effect on attitudes toward government, perhaps because allegations of vote improprieties were not new information. In contrast, the large protest of December 10th increased trust in government. Heightened trust arises largely from non-supporters of the ruling party updating their beliefs rather than from social desirability bias, a perceived improvement in government performance, or a “halo” effect. This finding is consistent with the view that autocrats can increase trust in government by unexpectedly allowing protest without repression. It also suggests that when evaluating trust in government citizens may cue not off the content of the protest, but off the holding of the protest itself.

Suggested Citation

  • Frye, Timothy & Borisova, Ekaterina, 2016. "Elections, protest and trust in government: A natural experiment from Russia," BOFIT Discussion Papers 9/2016, Bank of Finland, Institute for Economies in Transition.
  • Handle: RePEc:bof:bofitp:2016_009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://helda.helsinki.fi/bof/bitstream/123456789/14319/1/dp0916.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lorentzen, Peter L., 2013. "Regularizing Rioting: Permitting Public Protest in an Authoritarian Regime," Quarterly Journal of Political Science, now publishers, vol. 8(2), pages 127-158, February.
    2. Egorov, Georgy & Guriev, Sergei & Sonin, Konstantin, 2009. "Why Resource-poor Dictators Allow Freer Media: A Theory and Evidence from Panel Data," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 103(4), pages 645-668, November.
    3. Scott Gehlbach & Alberto Simpser, 2015. "Electoral Manipulation as Bureaucratic Control," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 59(1), pages 212-224, January.
    4. Enikolopov, Ruben & Makarin, Alexey & Petrova, Maria, 2016. "Social Media and Protest Participation: Evidence from Russia," CEPR Discussion Papers 11254, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    5. Reuter, Ora John & Szakonyi, David, 2015. "Online Social Media and Political Awareness in Authoritarian Regimes," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 45(1), pages 29-51, January.
    6. Dunning,Thad, 2012. "Natural Experiments in the Social Sciences," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107017665, November.
    7. Daniel Treisman, 2011. "Presidential Popularity in a Hybrid Regime: Russia under Yeltsin and Putin," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(3), pages 590-609, July.
    8. Dunning,Thad, 2012. "Natural Experiments in the Social Sciences," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107698000, November.
    9. Buckley, Noah & Frye, Timothy & Gehlbach, Scott & McCarthy, Lauren A., 2016. "Cooperating with the State: Evidence from Survey Experiments on Policing," Journal of Experimental Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(2), pages 124-139, January.
    10. Raymond Fisman, 2001. "Estimating the Value of Political Connections," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(4), pages 1095-1102, September.
    11. Hyde, Susan D. & Marinov, Nikolay, 2014. "Information and Self-Enforcing Democracy: The Role of International Election Observation," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 68(2), pages 329-359, April.
    12. Malesky, Edmund & Schuler, Paul, 2010. "Nodding or Needling: Analyzing Delegate Responsiveness in an Authoritarian Parliament," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 104(3), pages 482-502, August.
    13. Timothy Frye & John Reuter & David Szakonyi, 2012. "Political Machines at Work: Voter Mobilization and Electoral Subversion in the Workplace," HSE Working papers WP BRP 08/PS/2012, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • P26 - Economic Systems - - Socialist Systems and Transition Economies - - - Political Economy
    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:bof:bofitp:2016_009. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Minna Nyman). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/bofitfi.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.