ArticleScientific data2025
Panel Data on Perceived Electoral Legitimacy using Two Independent Samples.
Article in Scientific data, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Panel Data on Perceived Electoral Legitimacy using Two Independent Samples.Scientific data · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Understanding when and why people accept electoral outcomes is vital to the study of political psychology, mass politics, and democratic governance. Despite its clear theoretical and practical importance, however, most existing research on electoral legitimacy have been cross-sectional or have only examined a narrow range of theoretically relevant factors. In this data brief, we present data for two independent panel studies. Sample 1 completed two-waves before/after the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election (Wave 1: N = 1,079, Wave 2: N = 903). Sample 2 approximated national representativeness and completed four-waves before/after the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election and before/after the 2022 U.S. Congressional Midterm Elections (W1: N = 1,127, W2: N = 769, W3: N = 506, W4: N = 453). Both surveys include a wide range of measures theoretically relevant to perceived electoral illegitimacy and political attitudes and behavior. These data enable the scientific study of critical questions that surround perceived electoral legitimacy in American politics.
Identifiers
What 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.