| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Esaiasson, Peter, 1957, et al.
(författare)
-
Details Matter : Secluded Areas and Voting Secrecy with French Ballots
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Election Law Journal. - : Mary Ann Liebert. - 1533-1296 .- 1557-8062. ; 22:4, s. 327-336
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- To explore the psychology of voting secrecy, we conducted a field experiment to examine voter sensitivity to arrangements for ballot paper selection under the French ballot system (i.e., multiple ballot papers). Working closely with Swedish election authorities, we randomly assigned participants to vote in a fictional election under low, medium-high and high privacy conditions with a follow up paper-and-pen survey to record perceived voting secrecy. Results show that participants perceived an arrangement for selecting ballot papers behind a closed screen as clearly more secret than one where selection was public, and that a third and even more private arrangement, where voters did not have to walk a few meters with ballot papers in hand, potentially visible to onlookers, provided even higher levels of perceived secrecy. The study demonstrates that voters are sensitive even to small changes in the voting environment. Accordingly, election administrators should be aware that details matter for the experience of voting secretly. Copyright 2023, Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers.
|
|
| 3. |
- Esaiasson, Peter, 1957, et al.
(författare)
-
Reconsidering the Role of Procedures for Decision Acceptance
- 2019
-
Ingår i: British Journal of Political Science. - 0007-1234 .- 1469-2112. ; 49:1, s. 291-314
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Procedural fairness theory posits that the way in which authoritative decisions are made strongly impacts people's willingness to accept them. This article challenges this claim by contending that democratic governments can achieve little in terms of acceptance of policy decisions by the procedural means at their disposal. Instead, outcome favorability is the dominant determinant of decision acceptance. The article explicates that while central parts of procedural fairness theory are true, outcome favorability is still overwhelmingly the strongest determinant of individuals' willingness to accept authoritative decisions. It improves on previous research by locating all key variables into one causal model and testing this model using appropriate data. Findings from a large number of experiments (both vignette and field) reproduce the expected relationships from previous research and support the additional predictions.
|
|
| 4. |
- Esaiasson, Peter, 1957
(författare)
-
Social tillit i Riksdagen
- 2018
-
Ingår i: David Karlsson (red): Folkets främsta företrädare.. - Göteborg : Förvaltningshögskolan. - 9789198454727
-
Bokkapitel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- De Fine Licht, Jenny, 1982, et al.
(författare)
-
Handling Hard Decisions
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Paper presented at the Nordic Municipal Research Conference, November 26-28, 2020. - Göteborg.
-
Konferensbidrag (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
| 7. |
- De Fine Licht, Jenny, 1982, et al.
(författare)
-
“It’s Not Over When It’s Over”―Post-Decision Arrangements and Empirical Legitimacy
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 1053-1858 .- 1477-9803. ; 32:1, s. 183-199
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- A chronic problem for democratic governments is generating legitimacy for policy decisions that go against substantial groups of citizens’ legitimate interests. The primary means of achieving this aim involve the arrangements through which policy decisions are made. Whereas research in the field has tended to focus on the arrangements leading up to a decision, this paper draws attention to developments after a formal policy decision has been made. We theorize that the formal decision constitutes a focal event that motivates affected individuals to update their beliefs about the decision. We identify four types of potential legitimacy-enhancing post-decision arrangements: how the decision is announced; how it is publicly explained; whether the process allows for post-decision voice; and whether decision-makers take actions to mitigate its negative consequences. The results from two survey experiments with large samples of Swedish adults addressing the case of school closures suggest that post-decision procedures have legitimacy-enhancing potential and that this effect is not dependent on the pre-decision process.
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- De Fine Licht, Jenny, 1982, et al.
(författare)
-
When Interests Collide – Politicians’ Perceptions of Hard Decisions
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Paper presented at the workshop “Improving on perfection? Democratic innovations in Nordic democracies” at the 2021 Congress of the Nordic Political Science Association (digital), and at the panel ”Destructive or Deliberative? Deliberation among the Political Elite” at the ECPR conference 2021 (digital)..
-
Konferensbidrag (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
