Theses and Dissertations from UMD
Permanent URI for this communityhttp://hdl.handle.net/1903/2
New submissions to the thesis/dissertation collections are added automatically as they are received from the Graduate School. Currently, the Graduate School deposits all theses and dissertations from a given semester after the official graduation date. This means that there may be up to a 4 month delay in the appearance of a give thesis/dissertation in DRUM
More information is available at Theses and Dissertations at University of Maryland Libraries.
Browse
5 results
Search Results
Item Racial Moderation as Preference or Constraint? Examining Racial Pragmatism Among Black Americans(2023) Bishop, William B; Banks, Antoine; Government and Politics; Digital Repository at the University of Maryland; University of Maryland (College Park, Md.)In this dissertation, I offer a theory of racial pragmatism to explain how the broader social context influences the social and political behavior of Black Americans. I define racial pragmatism as a Black belief system where through double consciousness (DuBois 1903) and their use of the pragmatic method (Dewey 1929), adherents are aware of Americans’ opposition to Black voters’ desired social changes. This reality has led pragmatic Black Americans to conclude that as a group, Black Americans are hampered in their ability to articulate and enact a progressive and racialized political agenda that uniquely benefits members of their racial group. Behaving similarly to pragmatic Black elites such as David Dinkins and Barack Obama (Harris 2012; Marable and Clark 2009; Reft 2009), when striving for social progress, I argue that pragmatic Black voters are hesitant to embrace race conscious political strategies, policies, and candidates, not because they oppose them outright, but rather they view these race-conscious options as ineffective in the current social environment. To evaluate my theory, I created an 8-item survey measure of racial pragmatism. I find that racial pragmatism is a statistically reliable measure and I found repeated support for my theory through a series of observational and experimental studies. As racial pragmatism increases, Black Americans are less likely to vote for racially progressive Democrats, offer more moderate positions on racial policies such as reparations, and envision greater political backlash from white Americans when politicians speak out about racial issues that affect Black people. I also find that pragmatists are more reactive to threat when compared to co-racial group members who scored lower in racial pragmatism. As racial pragmatism increases, Black Americans are more likely to compromise and abandon their liberal policy positions when responding to threat stimuli. Finally, I also found that my theory and measure of racial pragmatism has important social implications outside of politics. As racial pragmatism increases, Black Americans are more likely to both support and engage in strategic deracialization efforts such as codeswitching to mute their racial identities and increase their chances of fair treatment in American society. This research provides insight into the complex actions that Black Americans employ in their daily lives to compensate for prejudice and strategically develop tactics for achieving uplift in a country that is hostile to their interests and rights. Through racial pragmatism, some Black Americans make strategic and deliberate choices to deemphasize their racial identities and relegate racial issues in politics to decrease their chances of experiencing prejudice and backlash from non-Black Americans.Item VOTING FOR CORRUPTION: WHEN DO VOTERS SUPPORT CORRUPT POLITICIANS?(2015) McNally, Darragh Charles; Calvo, Ernesto; Uslaner, Eric; Government and Politics; Digital Repository at the University of Maryland; University of Maryland (College Park, Md.)This dissertation explores the determinants of when voters are willing to support corrupt politicians. The first paper presents a unique survey experiment that asks respondents to choose between pairs of politicians who have different ideological positions, and are accused of corruption. The survey goes some way toward recreating the tradeoffs one makes when voting in the real world. Results show that voters are more likely to choose corrupt politicians who agree with their position on an issue when issue salience is high. Results also show that institutional trust decreases the likelihood of choosing a corrupt politician, while perceptions of corruption increase the likelihood. Institutional trust and perceptions of corruption also have a modifying effect on issue salience. The second paper uses several datasets to test the effects of several mechanisms on the likelihood of a person voting for Silvio Berlusconi. Taking Berlusconi as the archetypal corrupt yet electorally successful politician I show that social norms that justify corruption in one’s peer group extend to voting and increase the likelihood of supporting Berlusconi. I find that perceptions of political corruption have an effect on the likelihood of supporting Berlusconi, and that this effect is not constant over time. I also find that trust in the judiciary has no effect on the likelihood of supporting Berlusconi – contrary to Berlusconi’s claims of persecution by the judiciary – and that trusting the institution of television has a strong effect on the likelihood of voting for Berlusconi. The third paper uses a unique survey experiment to measure changes in the support of voters for corrupt politicians. Results show that context matters, with voters’ sensitivity to corruption being shaped by the type of political post held by politicians and the overall corruption in the political system. Experimental results show that voters are more forgiving of acts of corruption among higher ranked politicians in executive politicians, when corruption is common. Overall, I provide evidence showing that voters are often willing to support corrupt politicians, and that transparency alone will have a limited effect in increasing the likelihood that corrupt politicians will be punished electorally.Item Incivility in Mass Political Discourse: The Causes and Consequences of an Uncivil Public(2013) Gervais, Bryan T.; Uslaner, Eric M.; Government and Politics; Digital Repository at the University of Maryland; University of Maryland (College Park, Md.)In this dissertation project, I explore the effect that exposure to uncivil political talk has on deliberative attitudes and behavior. I hypothesize that incivility in political discourse can induce anti-deliberative attitudes among the public, and increases the use of incivility in political talk. I argue that an anti-deliberative spirit among the public helps fuel mass partisan polarization, and limits the positive effects that come from public deliberation. Using survey data, I find that use of incivility by the public when talking politics has increased. This trend has come alongside changes in partisan polarization and media over the last few decades. A separate analysis confirms the tie between exposure to partisan, uncivil media and uncivil political talk; using panel data, I find that exposure to political talk radio and pundit-based television programming leads audience members with like-minded political views to mimic uncivil language and tactics when expressing their own political opinions. I use experimental methods to explore incivility's effects more in-depth. Drawing from affective intelligence theory, I hypothesize that political incivility has the ability to induce anger, which in turn reduces deliberative attitudes. In one experiment, I manipulate the amount of incivility in an online message board. I find that uncivil political talk induced feelings of anger in individuals when one's partisan in-group was targeted, and led to an increased use of incivility when the partisan out-group was targeted. When feelings of anger are stimulated in people, they reprimand the uncivil "perpetrator" on the message board, and display anti-deliberative attitudes--including a reduced propensity to consider alternative views and lower levels of satisfaction with interactive online communication. A second experiment, embedded in a national survey, confirms that disagreeable incivility and like-minded incivility have different effects. Uncivil messages that are disagreeable induce feelings of anger, decrease willingness to compromise, and boost use of incivility. While the connection between like-minded incivility, anger, and anti-deliberative attitudes is less clear, uncivil messages lead like-minded messages to mimic uncivil and anti-deliberative behavior. My findings show that incivility limits political deliberation. I conclude by noting the consequences of this, as well as directions for future research.Item Contested Populism: The Cross-pressured White Working Class in American Politics(2010) McTague, John Michael; Morris, Irwin L; Government and Politics; Digital Repository at the University of Maryland; University of Maryland (College Park, Md.)While there has been a fair amount of research on class cleavages in the United States, the extant literature is a muddle of competing explanations of the political behavior of the white working class. Some argue that they are trending more Democratic on economic grounds in an era of growing inequality, while others point to growing Republican support based on social, cultural, and moral issues. I argue that the white working class is cross-pressured in a political environment that makes both the economic and cultural dimensions of class salient. Class shapes important economic outcomes, such as income, but it also socializes an authoritarian worldview. Although the Republican Party has made strong inroads with this constituency on the basis of their relatively higher levels of authoritarianism, the Democratic Party remains a competitive alternative based on its economic policies.Item Rural Voting Behavior in the 21st Century(2010) Karnes, Kimberly Anna-Kate; Gimpel, James G; Government and Politics; Digital Repository at the University of Maryland; University of Maryland (College Park, Md.)This dissertation provides an update of the literature on American rural political behavior. As a field of study, rural political behavior has been under studied, with the last influential piece of work being written in the 1960s. Since that time, popular culture and academia have relied on outdated work and antidotal evidence to perpetuate stereotypes about rural America. Utilizing the Cooperative Congressional Election Study from 2006 and 2008, I investigate numerous aspects of political behavior in rural America to paint a picture of 21st century rural politics. I find that even after accounting for standard compositional values, living in a rural area has a significant independent effect on some aspects of political behavior, such as president and self-reported party identification. However, rural residence does not account for a completely unique political behavior of its residents- some political attitudes are shared by both rural and urban residents, and rural residents are highly alike their suburban fringe neighbors. The findings in this dissertation highlight that rural America is not a static political environment, and should be given the same consideration that urban and suburban political behavior receive.