Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T00:12:38.305Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Message Received? Experimental Findings on How Messages about Corruption Shape Perceptions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 May 2018

Caryn Peiffer
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'

Keywords

corruptionawareness raisingexperimentperceptionsIndonesia
Type
Note
Information
British Journal of Political Science , Volume 50 , Issue 3 , July 2020 , pp. 1207 - 1215
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

School for Policy Studies, University of Bristol (email: caryn.peiffer@bristol.ac.uk). The author thanks Professor David Hudson, Professor Heather Marquette and Dr. Grant Walton for their encouragement and for reviewing earlier drafts of this article. The author also thanks the team at REDI in Jakarta for their work on this project. Data replication sets are available in Harvard Dataverse at: https://dx.doi.org/10.7910/DVN/SQETXX and online appendices at https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123418000108.

References

Anduiza, Eva, Gallego, Aina, and Munoz, Jordi. 2013. Turning a Blind Eye: Experimental Evidence of Partisan Bias in Attitudes Towards Corruption. Comparative Political Studies 46 (12):1664–1692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berinsky, Adam, Hutchings, Vincent, Mendelberg, Tali, Shaker, Lee, and Valentino, Nicholas. 2011. Sex and Race: Are Black Candidates More Likely to be Disadvantaged by Sex Scandals? Political Behavior 33 (2):179–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brody, Richard, and Page, Brody. 1972. Comment: Assessment of Policy Voting. American Political Science Review 66 (2):450–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carmines, Edward, and Stimson, James. 1989. Issue Evolution: Race and the Transformation of American Politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Carter, Travis, Ferguson, Melissa, and Hassin, Ran. 2011. A Single Exposure to the American Flag Shifts Support Toward Republicans Up to 8 Months Later. Psychological Science 22 (8):1011–1018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chong, Alberto, De La O, Ana, Karlan, Dean, and Wantchekon, Leonard. 2015. Does Corruption Information Inspire the Fight or Quash the Hope? A Field Experiment in Mexico on Voter Turnout, Choice, and Party Identification. The Journal of Politics 77 (1):55–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corbacho, Ana, Gingerich, Daniel, Oliveros, Virginia, and Ruiz-Vega, Maurcio. 2016. Corruption as a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy: Evidence from a Survey Experiment in Costa Rica. American Journal of Political Science 60 (4):1077–1092.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erisen, Cengiz, Lodge, Milton, and Taber, Charles. 2014. Affective Contagion in Effortful Political Thinking. Political Psychology 35 (2):187–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Figueiredo, Miguel, Hidalgo, F., and Kasahara, Yuri. 2011. When Do Voters Punish Corrupt Politicians? Experimental Evidence from Brazil. Berkeley: University of California Berkeley.Google Scholar
Jones, Alun. 2011. International Corruption Prevention: Awareness Raising Campaigns and Public Education. Available from https://www.unodc.org/documents/yournocounts/DohaPresentation/3_Side_Event_presentation_Alun_Jones.ppt, accessed 5 July 2017.Google Scholar
Lenz, Gabriel. 2009. Learning and Opinion Change, Not Priming: Reconsidering the Priming Hypothesis. American Journal of Political Science 53 (4):821–837.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Panth, Sabina. 2011. Changing Norms is Key to Fighting Everyday Corruption. Available from http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTGOVACC/Resources/ChangingNormsAnnexFinal.pdf, accessed 5 July 2017.Google Scholar
Peiffer, Caryn. 2018. Replication Data for Message received? Experimental findings on how messages about corruption shape perceptions, doi: 10.7910/DVN/SQETXX,Harvard Dataverse V1.Google Scholar
Peiffer, Caryn, and Alvarez, Linda. 2016. Who Will Be the ‘Principled Principals’? Perceptions of Corruption and Willingness to Engage in Anticorruption Activism. Governance 29 (3):351–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Persson, Anna, Rothstein, Bo, and Teorell, Jan. 2013. Why Anticorruptino Reforms Fail – Systemic Corruption as a Collective Action Problem. Governance 26 (3):449–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riker, William. 1986. The Art of Political Manipulation. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Taber, Charles, and Lodge, Milton. 2006. Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs. American Journal of Political Science 50 (3):755–769.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
United Nations. 2004. United Nations Convention Against Corruption. Vienna: United Nations on Drugs and Crime.Google Scholar
Winters, Matthew, and Weitz-Shapiro, Rebecca. 2013. Lacking Information or Condoning Corruption: When Will Voters Support Corrupt Politicians. Comparative Politics 45 (4):418–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Peiffer supplementary material

Peiffer supplementary material 1

Download Peiffer supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 156.9 KB
Supplementary material: PDF

Peiffer supplementary material

Peiffer supplementary material 2

Download Peiffer supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 40 KB
Supplementary material: PDF

Peiffer supplementary material

Peiffer supplementary material 3

Download Peiffer supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 624.2 KB
Supplementary material: Link

Peiffer Dataset

Dataset

https://dx.doi.org/10.7910/DVN/SQETXX
Link