![Sample our Behavioral Sciences journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110801/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Behavioral-Sciences.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Matland and Murray (2019) reanalyze three of their previous field experiments and fail to reproduce the finding reported in Panagopoulos and van der Linden (2016) that political identity moderates the watchful eye effect on voter mobilization in elections. We highlight several concerns with their empirical approach, including lack of power and between-study differences, that lead us to conclude that the authors offer little evidence against partisan heterogeneity. By contrast, closer inspection and additional analyses of the data reported in Panagopoulos and van der Linden (2016) only reinforce our original conclusion that partisanship moderates voter responsiveness to watchful eyes. Specifically, Republicans appear to be more susceptible to watchful eyes compared to Democrats in the context of voting in elections.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes
1. If we consider comparisons using the placebo conditions instead, the studies are even less powerful relative to the larger samples that leverage the pure control conditions.