ArticleNature human behaviour2024
The relationship between political ideology and judgements of bias in distributional outcomes.
Article in Nature human behaviour, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Response to collective threat: Russian invasion unifies Ukrainians across ethnic, linguistic, religious and geographic lines.Royal Society open science · 2025Article
- Reply to Vogt et al.: What does it mean that a phenomenon generalizes?Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We examine judgements of bias in distributional outcomes. Such judgements are often based on imbalance in distributional outcomes, namely, the under- or over-representation of a target group relative to some baseline. Using data from 26 studies (N = 14,925), we test how these judgements of bias vary with the target group's characteristics (traditionally dominant or non-dominant) and the observer's political ideology (liberal or conservative). We find that conservatives set a higher threshold for recognizing bias against traditionally non-dominant targets (women, Black people, immigrants), as compared with liberals. Conversely, liberals set a higher threshold for recognizing bias against traditionally dominant targets (men, white people, native-born citizens), as compared with conservatives. However, these relationships between political ideology and judgements of bias diminish when the targets are unknown or ideologically irrelevant. These findings emphasize the context-dependency of bias judgements and underscore the importance of stimulus sampling and appropriate selection of controls.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38409287What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.