Published on the LSE Europp blog on 8 June 2106
A referendum implies two radically different choices. On the one hand, you can vote for a change, such as a constitutional change, the introduction of a new policy, or the approval of a new treaty. On the other, you can refuse the proposed change and maintain the status quo.
Although choosing the status quo does not necessarily correspond to the safest option, it does correspond to the less uncertain one. “Brexit is riskier than Bremain”, as Timothy Garton Ash wrote in relation to the upcoming EU referendum. But considering the intrinsic differences between referendum options, does information also have different effects on voting decisions?
The Centre for the Study of Public Policy (CSPP) at University of Strathclyde has published a new version of my working paper on the effect of information in the Scottish independence referendum. The abstract of the paper is available here.
From 17 to 20 May I was in Konstanz at a symposium organised by the Graduate School of Decision Science, University of Konstanz. The symposium, entitled “Exploring Ignorance: Acquisition, Selection and Processing of Information” , gathered scholars from political science, economics and psychology, and was a fantastic chance to explore the topics of information processing and decision making from an interdisciplinary perspective.
As part of the programme, I presented part of my research on the effects of information in the campaign for the 2014 Scottish independence referendum.
My article “Voting under uncertainty: the effect of information in the Scottish independence referendum” has been published in the Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties.
The article presents part of the results of a broader study on the 2014 Scottish independence referendum. It’s available here.
Published on the EPOP Blog on 4 May 2106
Voting Yes or No in a referendum is a substantially different choice. While Yes votes imply support for a change, No votes generally confirm the status quo. Such an imbalance is clear in the upcoming EU referendum in the UK. On the one hand, voters can choose to confirm Britain’s current status as a member of the European Union, while, on the other, they can opt for leaving the EU, with all the risks and uncertainties related to breaking an alliance that has lasted since the 1973. Considering these intrinsic differences between the two referendum options, how will the arguments from both sides of campaign influence the vote?
From 7 to 10 April I was in Chicago at the Annual conference of the Midwest Political Science Association (MPSA), where I presented my study on negative campaigning in the 2015 UK general elections.
On 3-4 December I attended the Political Psychology conference in Amsterdam, where I presented my recent paper on “The polarizing effect of negative campaigning: Evidence from the 2015 UK elections”.
The conference, organised by members of the Amsterdam School for Communication Research (ASCoR), was a fantastic chance to meet great scholars working on political and social psychology in Europe.
I’ve been interwied by El Español for an article on the UK’s EU membership referendum:
Las caras del referéndum británico sobre abandonar la UE
Las campañas a favor y en contra del ‘Brexit’ han abandonado la línea de salida y los principales partidos evidencian sus divisiones.
Read the article here
I have recently contributed to an expert consultation on media diversity in South Korea. The consultation, launched by Professor Kyung-sin Park and commissioned by the Ministry of Culture of South Korea, focussed on how and whether online intermediaries should be taken into account in the measurement of media diversity.
More information is available on opennetkorea.org.
The online experiment on Scottish independence and the UK election which I conducted at University of Edinburgh featured on The Times and The Herald Scotland: