Yphtach Lelkes

Stargazer

Texreg

Both handle a wide range of models, although there are some differences. Stargazer can convert multinom, for example, both convert lmer.

wapo

and link from monkey cage

Here’s the gated poq article:

http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2012/09/15/poq.nfs038.full.pdf

and some “international” coverage:

http://www.slate.fr/monde/62445/republicain-democrate-couple-possible

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/09/you-hate-me-you-really-hate-me

http://jezebel.com/5947176/republicans-and-democrats-are-less-tolerant-of-interparty-marriage

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/09/really-would-you-let-your-daughter-marry-a-democrat/262959/

i’m a bonefide social scientist apparently.

Edits were sent for proofing to POQ. Hence, In Press.

Abstract

The current debate over the extent of polarization among the American mass public focuses on the extent to which policy attitudes have moved. While “maximalists” claim that partisans’ views on policies have become more extreme over time (Abramowitz 2010), “minimalists” (Fiorina and Abrams 2009) respond that the majority of Americans remain centrist, and that what little centrifugal movement has occurred reflects sorting, i.e., the increased association between partisanship and ideology. We argue in favor of an alternative definition of polarization, based on the classic concept of social distance (Bogardus 1947). Using data from a variety of sources, we demonstrate that both Republicans and Democrats increasingly dislike, even loathe their opponents. We also find that partisan affect is only weakly founded in policy attitudes; thus movement in policy attitudes may not explain affective polarization. The more plausible account lies in the nature of political campaigns; exposure to messages attacking the out-group confirms partisans’ biased views of their opponents. 

My friend and frequent collaborator Ariel Malka, a professor of psychology at Yeshiva University, just wrote an op-ed at Fox News.com:

Are religious Americans always conservative?

Headed to MPSA to present papers on these panels:

Our article is officially published:

Malka, A., Lelkes, Y., Srivastava, S., Cohen, A. B., & Miller, D. T. (2012). The association of religiosity and political conservatism: The role of political engagement. Political Psychology, 33, 275-299.

There was a blurb about this a little while back at BPS Research Digest.

i’m not a fan of legends in graphs. in my mind, lines that are labeled directly are easier to read. This is done easily with directlabels package by Toby Dylan Hocking.

Just create a ggplot object and wrap it in the command directlabels().

I used it, for example, to label a plot of abortion preferences overtime by liberal-conservative self-placement.

[sourcecode language="plain"]
abortion <- na.omit(ddply(.data=data, .variables=.(year,ideology), .fun=summarise, wtd.mean=mean(x=abortion,na.rm=T,weights=vcf0009a)))
library(directlabels)
library(ggplot2)
direct.label(ggplot(abortion, aes(x = year, y = wtd.mean, colour=ideology)) + geom_line() + theme_bw() + opts(axis.title.x = theme_text(size = 12, vjust = .25)) + ylab("Support for Abortion Rights") + opts(legend.position="")+ scale_x_continuous(limits=c(1972,2015),breaks=seq(from=1972,to=2008,by=6))+xlab("Year"),"last.points")
[/sourcecode]