Race and Religion at the Ballot Box: Building a Better Bias Detector

News | Mind & Brain

A new method tries to tell whether prejudice plays into voting choices

By Gary Stix ?| January 26, 2012?|

Image: The Obama-Biden Transition Project

The color of a candidate?s skin failed to sway voters to depress the lever for either Obama or McCain in the 2008 election, immediate analyses of that contest seemed to suggest. Some pundits hailed it as the first postracial election.

But a closer look after the election has revealed a much more nuanced picture of that historic faceoff. It turns out that as many as a fifth of the voters cared about race more than other considerations like gender, endorsements by a local newspaper or a candidate?s political party.

A study by political scientist Brian F. Schaffner at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst in the December issue of Political Psychology showed that concerns about race may have meant that Obama procured 3 percent less of the vote than he would have if he were white?enough to decide an election in a close race. ?It?s pretty clear that if Obama were white he would have done better than he did,? Schaffner says.

His finding echoes the results of similar probings by other researchers into the 2008 statistics. Schaffner?s work stands out, though, because of the care that he took in trying to figure out whether a voter was trying to mask biases about the hyper-sensitive issue of race. The researcher devised what he calls an ?unobtrusive observational measure? to try to elicit a voter?s real opinions.

Schaffner deployed a simple ranking method to get beyond what political scientists call ?social desirability bias:? voters? attempts to cover up opinions that they know might be repellent to others. After the election, Schaffner asked 934 respondents, 825 of whom voted, to rank the importance of six items from most to least helpful in making a decision.

Whites who placed race higher on the list, which included a candidate?s gender, occupation, political party and other factors, were less likely to vote for Obama, The definition of? ?higher? encompassed any ranking from first to fourth on the list, allowing the survey to detect the importance of race even if respondents didn?t rank that category first and may have wanted to hide their views.

These findings held up even after taking into account a measure of political conservatism, specifically, opposition to affirmative action. A white respondent who opposed affirmative action but put race last instead of fourth on the list was 25 percent more likely to vote for Obama. In the 2012 election, Schaffner wants to use the same method to examine, not only race, but this year?s added hot-button issue of Mitt Romney?s religion.

A well-known political blog, The Monkey Cage, raised the question of whether trying to deduce voters? recondite opinions was really needed. John Sides, a political scientist at George Washington University, noted that other studies had produced similar results even when asking respondents more directly about their racial prejudices. Schaffner defends his methodology, citing evidence from exit polls that indicates that social desirability bias really matters. ?If people are obscuring answers, that?s going to make it much more difficult to detect what the effect is of those answers,? he says.

Source: http://rss.sciam.com/click.phdo?i=35655ca80a14627c1dc1aaac4338f7ed

david arquette lionfish lionfish conjoined twins justin bieber paternity justin bieber paternity denver news