Share this page!

Matt Grossmann Profile picture
Twitter logo
18 Oct, 4 tweets, 1 min read
Expected to like "WEIRDest People in the World" more than I did:
amazon.com/dp/0374173222/…
A splitter when it comes to contemporary life (most evidence is culturally & temporally specific) & a lumper on human history (mostly unidimensional development with a few big causes)
1/n
No ? biased social science samples are erroneously generalized globally & in human history, but that's not an easy problem to escape. Also clear cultural development is important, but that means there are often many long-term & proximal contextual & individual causes of behavior
Unlikely there is a generic effect of complex variables like education or religion; studies showing long-term associations with spread of churches are useful but not definitive. Individualism & nepotism are important global variations, but correlated with many other things
That said, full of interesting paths to follow:
- Effects of marriage institutions
- Limits of social trust but strength of conformity
- Long term regional differences in Italy, China, & India
- Effect of market experience on rational choice violations
- Correlates of innovation

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Matt Grossmann

Matt Grossmann Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @MattGrossmann

Matt Grossmann Profile picture
20 Oct
"The Limits of Party: Congress & Lawmaking in a Polarized Era" shows that much policymaking commentary is wrong. Despite more partisan processes, legislative outcomes have not changed: they are just as bipartisan & (un)productive as usual
1/n
 amazon.com/Limits-Party-C…
Although Congress passes fewer bills, they pass more pages of legislation.

Out of 265 majority party priority items since 1985, congressional majorities have failed on 47% of them, mostly succeed on 21% of them, & achieved partial success on the rest.
amazon.com/Limits-Party-C… Image
No matter whether you consider all bills that pass Congress, only landmark legislation, or only majority party priorities, most of what passes generates support from minority party legislators & leaders. The path commentators expect, rolling over the opposition party, is rare. ImageImage
Read 10 tweets
Matt Grossmann Profile picture
19 Oct
Democrats are set to gain from increasing diversity & generational change over time. Even assuming some conservative trends with age, electorate population replacement should mean substantial Democratic gains, especially if young people retain their lean.
Image
Even assuming that younger generations become more conservative with age, Democrats would gain several swing states based on increasing diversity & moderated generational replacement effects. This projection suggests strong effects in the Electoral College
Image
On demographics, my questions are:
1) What if white voters become more Republican as a function of increasing racial diversity?
2) What if education is just a relative, not absolute effect (eg "some college" voters become more Rep as college degrees increase)?
@rp_griffin
Read 4 tweets
Matt Grossmann Profile picture
1 Oct
Corporate personnel experts led the adoption & expansion of affirmative action recruitment & evaluation, diversity training, work/life balance policies, & harassment grievance procedures, with law & movements following

Finished this great book suggestion:
amazon.com/Inventing-Equa…
Who codified Affirmative Action policies & procedures? Lockheed Martin
Companies with federal contracts were vaguely pushed to improve & they developed the recruiting, hiring, & supervisor assessment tools, diffusing them so they were accepted by law as key good faith efforts 2/n
The personnel profession found new uses for their union-era procedures as private unions declined, vastly increasing their workforce (& with more women). In turn, they became advocates & institutional homes for more equal opportunity programs & enlarging their focus to women 3/n
Read 7 tweets
Matt Grossmann Profile picture
1 Oct
Republicans & Democrats represent different interest group sectors & economic classes. We have organized elite competition, not oligarchy. But that still provides multiple paths for unequal public class influence

My latest with @wsisaac & Zuhaib Mahmood:
journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.108…
Republican leaders' positions on policy are more closely associated with the opinions of the upper class (top 10%) on economic policy. Democratic leaders' positions more closely match those of the middle class
#polisciresearch
journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.108… Image
Rep & Dem positions are more strongly & consistently associated with interest group positions across policy areas than with public classes. Reps & business groups are aligned; Dems & advocacy groups are aligned; Dems are negatively aligned with business, Reps with advocacy groups Image
Read 5 tweets
Matt Grossmann Profile picture
30 Sep
CBS/YouGov post-debate poll had Biden winning 48-41% but more Reps calling it a tie (& improved opinion of Biden & decreased of Trump)

CNN/SSRS had Biden winning 60-28%! That's a big difference. Is it due to repeatedly polled (& solid) YouGov panelists? Other method differences?
538/Ipsos has a post-debate result closer to CNN. 60-33% Biden on best performance, but little movement on favorability or candidate preferences
projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-biden-de…
DFP poll on who won the debate is 52-39% Biden (weighted to likely voters):
vox.com/2020/9/30/2149…
Average margin across the four "who won" polls was +20 Biden (including the CNN phone poll where more Dems responded). But there's not much sign of a likely race shake up.
Read 5 tweets
Matt Grossmann Profile picture
30 Sep
Whether, how much, & on what basis to include the social sciences at the National Science Foundation has been politicized from the beginning, with the Right worried about waste & ideology & social scientists responding with rigor & ties to natural science
amazon.com/Social-Science…
Scientists & politicians questioned whether the social sciences were driven by ideological values & whether they could be sciences repeatedly; to insulate, NSF prioritized those most closely tied to biology & those involving the most math & computers (causing concern on the left)
Social science (& political science in particular) were expanded via political pressure from liberals in 60s to help solve social problems, but both applied efforts & educational curricula drew conservative & scientist ire in 70s; specific projects highlighted as wasteful & lefty
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Like this author's thread?

Get email notifications when new thread is out from this Author!

Check out other threads from this Author!

Read all threads by @MattGrossmann