SOCIAL STUDIES |
Be specific
We all know political polarization is a problem, but studies show that Americans are less polarized than we think. What explains that misperception? A new study suggests it’s because of overly generic statements about people’s political beliefs. The study found that people only slightly misestimated the often modest differences in policy preferences across party lines, and yet they were inclined to endorse polarized generic statements, such as “Democrats support euthanasia” and “Republicans believe that the federal income tax that they pay is too high.” People also tended to recall statements from politicians as being generic (e.g., “Ohio farmers . . .”), even if they weren’t (“Many Ohio farmers . . .”). The authors note that the overuse of generic statements about political beliefs is especially concerning because such stereotypes are resistant to being dislodged by exceptions.
Novoa, G. et al., “Generically Partisan: Polarization in Political Communication,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (November 2023).
Lasting identities
Researchers at the University of Pennsylvania ran what they claim is the first randomized controlled trial of how genetic ancestry tests affect people’s identity. They recruited a nationwide sample of Americanborn non-Hispanic white people who had not yet taken an ancestry test, asked them about their identity, gave them an ancestry test, and then followed up about a year later. Compared with members of the control group, who didn’t take the DNA test, those who were given the test were only slightly more likely to describe their ethnic identities differently the second time around. It’s possible the control group participants became more aware of their family histories in the interim. But it could also be that the people who found surprises in their DNA tests didn’t like the results. As it happens, of the 64 participants who initially claimed Native American ancestry and were then tested, only one actually had it. While this prompted some to drop it from their ethnic identities, many did not.
Roth, W. & Yaylaci, S., “Genetic Options and Constraints: A Randomized Controlled Trial on How Genetic Ancestry Tests Affect Ethnic and Racial Identities,” American Journal of Sociology (forthcoming).
Borderline protection
Canada benefited and Americans companies and workers suffered when President Donald Trump tightened restrictions on H-1B work visas, which are often used in the tech sector, according to a new study by economists. Canada saw a surge of tens of thousands of additional high-tech immigrants, which increased the size and international competitiveness of our neighbor’s high-tech sectors. This harmed US high-tech sectors over and above the effect of being unable to bring in foreign workers. The upshot of the visa change was that some native workers in the United States who compete directly with foreign workers had less competition for jobs, but their employers and coworkers were hurt both by greater staffing challenges and by tougher business competition.
Brinatti, A. & Guo, X., “ThirdCountry Effects of U.S. Immigration Policy,” University of Michigan (November 2023).
One of each
In contrast to parents in much of the world, those in the United States generally don’t exhibit a preference for having sons, and this isn’t just a recent phenomenon. Based on census data from 1850 to 1940, a study found that US mothers whose first two children were the same sex were a couple of percentage points more likely to have a third child, with surprisingly little variation in that pattern over the decades. Mothers whose first two children were girls were only about 0.3 percentage points more likely to have a third child than mothers whose first two children were boys. This means the presumed preference for sons was about one seventh as large as the preference for having kids of both sexes. In the decades since, this preference for mixed-sex children has become even greater.
Jones, T. et al., “Changes in Parental Gender Preference in the USA: Evidence From 1850 to 2019,” Journal of Population Economics (October 2023).