Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

You can paste full URL like: https://x.com/threadreaderapp/status/1644127596119195649
or just the ID like: 1644127596119195649

How to get URL link on X (Twitter) App

  1. On the Twitter thread, click on or icon on the bottom
  2. Click again on or Share Via icon
  3. Click on Copy Link to Tweet
  4. Paste it above and click "Unroll Thread"!
  5. More info at Twitter Help
David Broockman Profile picture
David Broockman
@dbroockman
Day job = Associate Prof. of Political Science @UCBerkeley. Tweets = personal views.
Nov 25 • 20 tweets • 5 min read
NEW PAPER w/ @CSElmendorf & @j_kalla:

An under-appreciated reason why voters oppose dense new housing, especially in less-dense neighborhoods: they think it looks ugly and want to prevent that, even in other neighborhoods.

Some of what we think is NIMBYism might not be!

🧵 Image The US housing shortage is acute & driven by policy. The prevailing explanations for why voters oppose new supply focus on two things:

"Homevoters": Homeowners protecting property values.

"NIMBYism": Neighbors fearing local nuisances (traffic, parking) in their "backyard."
May 27 • 16 tweets • 6 min read
🚨NEW PAPER: Why are Members of Congress so extreme?

We conducted a 4-wave panel of thousands of voters in 27 districts during last year’s primary AND general elections to trace polarization’s roots

The results challenge conventional wisdom… and suggest lessons for parties🧵👇 Image Conventional wisdom blames:
• Primary voters who closely follow politics & prefer extremists
• General election voters who are too ignorant of candidate positions—or too “intoxicated” by party loyalty—to vote for moderates over extremists

But our data tells a different story… Image
Dec 2, 2024 • 9 tweets • 4 min read
🚨 NEW PAPER: When low-income Americans get $1,000/month for 3 years, what happens to their political views & behavior?

The OpenResearch Unconditional income Study reveals surprising findings about the effects of income on politics... 🧵 Image Reminder: in the study 1k low-income Americans got $1k/mo for 3 yrs, & were compared to a randomized 2k-person control group. Total of ~$40MM given away.

Threads w previous results:
x.com/smilleralert/s…
x.com/evavivalt/stat…
x.com/AlexBartik/sta…

Today: fx on politics...
Sep 12, 2024 • 10 tweets • 4 min read
NEW PAPER w/ @eriksantoro @j_kalla @ronchuli

There's a widespread idea that we will persuade other people more effectively if we listen to them first

The NYT has said it, social psych says it, & my previous research has assumed it

In a new study, we find it's likely wrong 🧵.. Image Paper here:

It's one of those ideas "everyone knows": to effectively persuade someone, first listen to them to build rapport & signal "receptiveness"

But, like so many such ideas, there are actually few if any convincing tests of it! (See our Appendix)osf.io/preprints/osf/…
Jul 22, 2024 • 21 tweets • 6 min read
Today we released the first papers from OpenResearch's Unconditional income Study, which gave 1k ppl $1k/mo for 3 yrs & had a N=2k control group

This 🧵 is for RCT nerds: how did we measure the cash's fx? Learn about 96% response rates, blood draws, changing a state law & more..
Image
Image Before I get into the details, here's links to:

- overview of findings so far:

- Paper on employment:

- Paper on health:

we'll have more papers soon on consumption, political views, & moreopenresearchlab.org/findings
nber.org/papers/w32719
nber.org/papers/w32711
Feb 15, 2024 • 11 tweets • 4 min read
NEW: in @apsrjournal we report a treasure trove of data from inside dozens of campaigns’ own experiments on persuasion

The data reveal experimentation at a vast scale that is revolutionizing campaigning

challenges academic theories

& could have implications for democracy

🧵 Image The data are from @Swayable, a vendor that helps campaigns run these experiments

Campaigns make ads, Swayable randomizes voters to see one of the ads or a control, & asks vote choice to estimate persuasion

Swayable’s agreements allowed them to share anonymized data with us.
May 18, 2023 • 14 tweets • 6 min read
NEW w @aaronrkaufman & @GabeLenz:

Every political scientist learns in grad school that voters use interest group ratings to help hold elected officials accountable

The problem is...we don't actually know this!

We find reality is not so encouraging...🧵

cambridge.org/core/journals/… Image First, it's hard to overstate how widespread the view is among political scientists that *we already know* voters regularly use interest group ratings to infer what their representatives did in office.

Basically every review of the literature on accountability says we know this. ImageImageImage
Apr 16, 2023 • 9 tweets • 6 min read
NEW w @j_kalla

Skeptics say partisan TV doesn't matter b/c few watch, viewers extreme anyway & they watch other news

w/ new data, we show this is WRONG

1 in 7 Americans watch >8hrs/mo partisan TV
They're not already extreme
They're in echo chambers

osf.io/b54sx/

🧵 Image How many ppl watch partisan TV, what they think & what else they watch are hard to study b/c ppl don't accurately report what they watch on surveys

w/o this data hard to know how much partisan TV matters

Research has struggled with this for ~a century

osf.io/b54sx/