Home          Biography          C.V.          Publications

 

Publications

 

2006

 

Malhotra, Neil. 2006. “Government Growth and Professionalism in U.S. State Legislatures.” Legislative Studies Quarterly. 31(4): 563-584.

 

Abstract: This article analyzes the professionalization of American state legislatures since the 1960s and expands on previous studies by considering the strategic incentives of members. Fiorina and Noll's (1978a, 1978b) theory that reelection-minded legislators serve as "ombudsmen to the bureaucracy" on behalf of their constituents suggests that legislatures have professionalized in response to growth in public spending in order to strengthen members' abilities to handle increased facilitation duties. I used longitudinal analysis and instrumental variables regression to test this hypothesis and disentangle causal directionality, since professional legislators may have the means and incentive to spend more than their citizen counterparts. Both methods revealed empirical support for the Fiorina and Noll hypothesis that spending increases caused legislators to become more professional.

 

2007

 

Chen, Jowei, and Neil Malhotra. 2007. “The Law of k/n: The Effect of Chamber Size on Government Spending in Bicameral Legislatures.” American Political Science Review. 101(4): 657-676.

 

Abstract: Recent work in political economics has examined the positive relationship between legislative size and spending, which Weingast et al. (1981) formalized as the law of 1/n. However, empirical tests of this theory have produced a pattern of divergent findings. The positive relationship between seats and spending appears to hold consistently for unicameral legislatures and for upper chambers in bicameral legislatures but not for lower chambers. We bridge this gap between theory and empirics by extending Weingast et al.'s model to account for bicameralism in the context of a Baron–Ferejohn bargaining game. Our comparative statics predict, and empirical data from U.S. state legislatures corroborate, that the size of the upper chamber (n) is a positive predictor of expenditure, whereas the ratio of lower-to-upper chamber seats (k) exhibits a negative effect. We refer to these relationships as the law of k/n, as the two variables influence spending in opposite directions.

 

Malhotra, Neil, and Jon A. Krosnick. 2007. “The Effect of Survey Mode and Sampling on Inferences about Political Attitudes and Behavior: Comparing the 2000 and 2004 ANES to Internet Surveys with Non-Probability Samples.” Political Analysis. 15(3): 286-323.

 

Abstract: Since the inception of the American National Election Study (ANES) in the 1940s, data have been collected via face-to-face interviewing in the homes of members of area probability samples of American adults, the same gold-standard approach used by the U.S. Census Bureau, other federal agencies, and some nongovernment researchers for many of the most high-profile surveys conducted today. This paper explores whether comparable findings about voters and elections would be obtained by a different, considerably less expensive method: Internet data collection from nonprobability samples of volunteer respondents. Comparisons of the 2000 and 2004 ANES data (collected via face-to-face interviewing with national probability samples) with simultaneous Internet surveys of volunteer samples yielded many differences in the distributions of variables and in the associations between variables (even controlling for differences between the samples in reported interest in politics). Accuracy was higher for the face-to-face/probability sample data than for the Internet/volunteer sample data in 88% of the possible comparisons. This suggests that researchers interested in assuring the accuracy of their findings in describing populations should rely on face-to-face surveys of probability samples rather than Internet samples of volunteer respondents.

 

Malhotra, Neil, and Jon A. Krosnick. 2007. “Procedures for Updating Classification Systems:  A Study of Biotechnology and the Standard Occupational Classification System.” Journal of Official Statistics. 23(3): 409-432.

 

Abstract: Government, business, and academic statistical organizations routinely develop classification systems to compartmentalize occupations, fields of study, foods, and many more classes of objects. When innovations occur in living and working conditions, so must innovations occur in these classification systems. This article explores the feasibility of applying cognitive psychology research techniques as a tool to guide such updating. The method entails two cognitive exercises and three analytical approaches that assist experts in identifying the deficiencies in an existing classification system. To illustrate application of the procedure, the method was applied to the Standard Occupational Classification System (SOC) in an effort to accommodate recent changes in the biotechnology industry. Various indicators attest to the validity of the results and therefore encourage use of the methodology with other classification systems and innovations.

 

Malhotra, Neil, and Jon A. Krosnick. 2007. “Retrospective and Prospective Performance Assessments during the 2004 Election Campaign: Tests of Mediation and News Media Priming.” Political Behavior. 29(2): 249-278.

 

Abstract: According to many theoretical accounts of the vote choice, distal determinants (e.g., party identification) influence proximal determinants (e.g., perceptions of candidates), which in turn shape candidate preferences. Yet almost no research on voting has formally tested such mediational hypotheses. Using national survey data collected between February and September of 2004, this paper begins by illustrating how to conduct such investigations. We explored whether public approval of President Bush’s handling of a series of specific national problems (e.g., the Iraq war) influenced overall assessments of his job performance and evaluations of his likely future performance versus John Kerry’s, which in turn shaped vote choices. The results are consistent with the claim of mediation and shed additional light on the impact of various issues on the 2004 election outcome. We also tested what we term the “dosage hypothesis,” derived from news media priming theory, which posits that changes in the amount of media coverage of an issue during the course of a campaign should precipitate changes in the weight citizens place on that issue when evaluating the president’s overall job performance, particularly among citizens most exposed to the news. Surprisingly, this analysis did not yield consistent support for the venerable dosage hypothesis, suggesting that the conditions under which priming occurs should be specified much more precisely in future work.

 

Malhotra, Neil, and Connor Raso. 2007. “Racial Representation and U.S. Senate Apportionment.” Social Science Quarterly. 88(4): 1038-1048.

 

Abstract: Objectives.  This research note explores whether the system of assigning each state equal representation in the U.S. Senate adversely affects racial minorities, groups that often have common political interests.  We also project changes in minority representation over the next twenty years using Census data.  Methods.  We develop a new method of assessing racial bias due to apportionment, which calculates the number of seats lost by groups due to equal representation, a more substantively meaningful statistic than correlational measures.  Results.  We find that both African-Americans and Hispanics are substantially underrepresented due to their greater presence in high-population states as compared to low-population states.  Whereas bias against African-Americans appears to be falling, the demographic patterns of Hispanics will make them even more underrepresented in coming years.  Conclusions.  These findings are especially consequential considering that malapportionment has important public policy implications, including greater per capita distributive benefits for smaller states.  Further, given that the Senate serves as a major veto point in American politics, racial bias due to equal apportionment may have a significant impact on current and future political debates relevant to minority groups.

 

2008

 

Malhotra, Neil, and Alexander G. Kuo. 2008. “Attributing Blame: The Public’s Response to Hurricane Katrina.” Journal of Politics. 70(1): 120-135.

 

Abstract: When government fails, whom do citizens blame?  Do these assessments rely on biased or content-rich information?  Despite the vast literatures on retrospective voting in political science and attribution in psychology, there exists little theory and evidence on how citizens apportion blame among public officials in the wake of government failure.  We designed a survey experiment in which respondents ranked seven public officials in order of how much they should be blamed for the property damage and loss of life in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina.  We manipulated the information provided to respondents, with some receiving the officials’ party affiliations, others receiving their job titles, and others receiving both cues.  We find that party cues cause individuals to blame officials of the opposite party, but citizens make more principled judgments when provided with information about officials’ responsibilities.  These results have implications for our understanding of the impact of heuristics and information on retrospective evaluations of government performance.

 

Malhotra, Neil, and Matthew E. Carnes. 2008. “Political Stability under Uncertainty: Applying Bounded Rationality to the Study of Governance and Civil Conflict.” British Journal of Political Science. 38(1): 45-64.

 

Abstract: A central puzzle in the comparative politics literature has been why certain societies are able to achieve political stability while others suffer from strife, repression and authoritarian rule. This article applies the solution concept of quantal response equilibrium (QRE) to Weingast's Sovereign-Constituency Co-ordination Game in order to show how our understanding of political stability can be enhanced when uncertainty and limited rationality are explicitly modeled. Comparative statics results first confirm the intuitive logic that civil conflict is unlikely when regimes threaten penalties for revolt that are much more severe than current living conditions and when the benefits to a successful revolt are not sufficiently enticing. In addition, our analysis provides a logic for the outbreak of civil conflict, noting that it is most likely when key payoffs are in their intermediate regions and far from critical ‘thresholds’, resulting in ambiguous and counterintuitive decision making by leaders and citizen opposition groups.

 

In Press

 

Malhotra, Neil. In press. “Order Effects in Complex and Simple Tasks.” Public Opinion Quarterly.

 

Abstract: There is strong evidence that the order in which response options are presented in surveys significantly affects the answers that respondents provide. According to the theory of survey satisficing, the severity of order effects should increase with task difficulty. However, the tasks provided to respondents in existing studies of response-order effects are generally very simple, making it difficult to evaluate the satisficing hypothesis. Further, evidence from cognitive psychology suggests a completely different mechanism: people are more motivated to persist in completing tasks when these tasks are intricate, challenging, and enriching. I designed survey experiments administered over the Internet consisting of two types of tasks: (1) a complex task in which respondents were asked to rank seven public officials in order of how much they should be blamed for the property damage and loss of life caused by Hurricane Katrina in the city of New Orleans; and (2) a series of simple tasks in which respondents answered items with ordinal response choices on rating scales. I found almost no order effects in the complex task among all educational groups. Conversely, I found significant and substantial order effects in the simple tasks, particularly among low-education respondents. These results suggest that theories of survey satisficing may simplify matters by assuming that satificing monotonically increases with task difficulty. Moreover, my findings have important implications for survey researchers designing their own questionnaires, underscoring the importance of randomizing response options.

 

Malhotra, Neil. In press. “Completion Time and Response Order Effects in Web Surveys.” Public Opinion Quarterly.

 

Abstract: The use of the World Wide Web to conduct surveys has grown rapidly over the past decade, raising concerns regarding data quality, questionnaire design, and sample representativeness. This research note focuses on an issue that has not yet been studied: Do respondents who complete self-administered Web surveys more quickly—perhaps taking advantage of participation benefits while minimizing effort—also “satsifice” and produce data of lower quality? We surveyed a random sample of the U.S. adult population over the Web and manipulated the order in which respondents saw the response options. We then assessed whether primacy effects were moderated by the overall length of time respondents took to complete the questionnaires. We found that low-education respondents who filled out the questionnaire most quickly were most prone to primacy effects when completing items with unipolar rating scales. Our results have important implications for various aspects of Web survey methodology including panel management, human-computer interaction, and response order randomization.

 

Malhotra, Neil, Jon A. Krosnick, and Randall K. Thomas. In press. “Optimal Design of Branching Questions to Measure Bipolar Constructs.” Public Opinion Quarterly.

 

Abstract: Scholars routinely employ rating scales to measure attitudes and other bipolar constructs via questionnaires, and prior research indicates that this is best done using sequences of branching questions in order to maximize measurement reliability and validity. To identify the optimal design of branching questions, this study analyzed data from several national surveys using various modes of interviewing. We compared two branching techniques and different ways of using responses to build rating scales. Three general conclusions received empirical support: (1) after an initial three-option question assessing direction (e.g., like, dislike, neither), respondents who select one of the endpoints should be asked to choose among three levels of extremity, (2) respondents who initially select a midpoint with a precise label should not be asked whether they lean one way or the other, and (3) bipolar rating scales with 7 points yield measurement accuracy superior to that of 3-, 5-, and 9-point scales.

 

Malhotra, Neil. In press. “Disentangling the Relationship between Legislative Professionalism and Government Spending.” Legislative Studies Quarterly.

 

Abstract: Recent movements to deprofessionalize American state legislatures have been driven partly by the notion that professional legislators spend more than their citizen counterparts. This paper explores the relationship between legislative professionalism and government spending, a question muddled by the possibility that legislators in high-spending states may choose professional institutions to better handle their responsibilities. Propensity score matching, an increasingly used technique of causal inference, is employed to disentangle the relationship. Contrary to previous academic work and popular notions, professional legislatures do not spend significantly more than part-time bodies, accounting for the fact that legislatures in high-spending states have a greater need to be professionalized and therefore select those structural frameworks. The findings have important implications for the study of the effects of legislative institutions on public policies more generally, and attest to the utility of recently developed techniques of causal inference to disentangle these relationships.

 

Gerber, Alan S., and Neil Malhotra. In press. “Publication Incentives and Empirical Research: Do Reporting Standards Distort the Published Results?” Sociological Methods and Research.

 

Abstract: Despite great attention to the quality of research methods in individual studies, if the publication decisions of journals are a function of the statistical significance of research findings, the published literature as a whole may not produce an accurate measure of true effects. This paper examines the two most prominent sociology journals (the ASR and the AJS) and another important, though less influential journal (TSQ) to see if there is evidence of publication bias. We examine the effect of the .05 significance level on the pattern of published findings using a “caliper” test (Gerber and Malhotra 2006) and can reject the hypothesis of no publication bias at approximately the 1 in 10,000,000 level. Our findings suggest that some of the results reported in the leading sociology journals may be misleading and inaccurate due to publication bias. We also discuss some of the reasons for publication bias and propose reforms to reduce its impact on research.

 

Gerber, Alan S., and Neil Malhotra. In press. “Do Statistical Reporting Standards Affect What Is Published? Publication Bias in Two Leading Political Science Journals.” Quarterly Journal of Political Science.

 

Abstract: We examine the APSR and the AJPS for the presence of publication bias due to reliance on the .05 significance level. Our analysis employs a broad interpretation of publication bias, which we define as the outcome that occurs when publication practices produce bias in the published parameter estimates. This can happen in several ways: (1) editors and reviewers may prefer significant results and reject methodologically-sound articles that do not achieve certain statistical significance thresholds; (2) scholars may send studies with statistically significant results to journals and place the rest in “file drawers”; (3) researchers may engage in data mining to find model specifications and sub-samples that achieve significance thresholds. We examine the effect of the .05 significance level on the pattern of published findings using a “caliper” test, a novel method for comparing studies with heterogeneous effects, and can reject the hypothesis of no publication bias at the 1 in 32,000,000,000 level. Our findings therefore raise the possibility that the results reported in the leading political science journals may be misleading due to publication bias. We also discuss some of the reasons for publication bias and propose reforms to reduce its impact on research.

 

Malhotra, Neil. In press. “The Impact of Public Financing on Electoral Competition: Evidence from Arizona and Maine.” State Politics and Policy Quarterly.

 

Abstract: Does complete public financing of campaigns enhance electoral competition? Arizona and Maine implemented similar clean elections programs for state-level races in 2000, providing an opportunity to examine the consequences of public financing. Employing two measures of competitiveness, I find that “clean elections” programs in both states significantly increased competition in districts where challengers accepted public funding. These findings suggest that public monies do not simply attract low-quality challengers and that access to campaign funds is an important determinant of competitiveness. As a result, while public financing programs are not panaceas for uncompetitive elections, such programs can enhance competition in races where money is accepted.

 

Malhotra, Neil. In press. “Partisan Polarization and Blame Attribution in a Federal System: The Case of Hurricane Katrina.” Publius: The Journal of Federalism.

 

Abstract: When multiple government authorities at overlapping levels of administration fail to do their jobs properly, whom do citizens hold responsible? People can potentially make more accurate judgments by taking into account the roles and responsibilities of the officials involved. However, if party identification plays a major role in shaping Americans’ attitudes on federalism, such information may potentially lead to even greater partisan polarization. This article explores these questions using a controlled experiment in which citizens were provided job titles of government officials involved in the poor response to Hurricane Katrina. Both Republican and Democratic citizens update their blame attributions in the same direction in response to new information. Despite polarized general attitudes on federalism, partisans do not polarize further when using specific information.