Thanks to AE @gijsschumacher.bsky.social, EICs Elizabeth Suhay & @mjbsp.bsky.social, three anonymous reviewers & the Political Psychology editorial staff. Read the full paper in Political Psychology at doi.org/10.1111/pops... 8/8
Future research could leverage quasi-experimental designs (airport noise changes, sleep disorder treatments, workplace shift policies) to strengthen causal inference while navigating experimental constraints. 7/8
Next steps: Our multi-dataset observational approach documents robust associations, identifies likely pathways, & reveals boundary conditions. 6/8
Why this matters: Sleep quality is unequally distributed in society. If we don't consider how sleep relates to political participation, addressing other resource disparities may not be enough to ensure healthy democratic systems. 5/8
These patterns vary meaningfully across national contexts. Results robust across multiple datasets & measurement approaches. 4/8
The previously documented curvilinear duration-turnout relationship? It emerges ONLY among poor sleepers. No association among well-rested individuals. Duration may serve a compensatory function when quality is compromised. 3/8
Key findings:
- Better sleep quality ↔ higher voter turnout
- Poor sleep quality ↔ greater non-electoral participation 2/8
New in @ispp-pops.bsky.social: “Waking up to politics: How sleep quality relates to political participation”: doi.org/10.1111/pops... With @nmicatka.bsky.social & @aleksks.bsky.social, we examined how sleep quality relates to voter turnout & non-electoral participation across multiple countries.🧵1/8
6/6 Bottom line: Emergency powers are not just about crisis response; they are structural features of authoritarian governance that can destabilize international peace.
#PoliSci #IR #Autocracy #Democracy #Emergency #InterstateDispute #Peace
5/6 Why it matters: When party-based or civilian autocracies implement emergency powers (officially or not), it turns out to be a red flag for international conflict risk.
Not because they are responding to crisis, but because constraints are removed and pressure to act increases.
4/6 Plot twist: There is a difference between declared and undeclared emergencies. Democracies tend to increase conflict during DECLARED emergencies, but autocracies during UNDECLARED ones.
Democracies need constitutional cover. Autocracies just grab power unofficially.
3/6 The answer: AUDIENCE COSTS
Party & civilian autocracies normally face some domestic accountability (party elites, limited institutions). But emergencies:
✖️ Remove institutional checks
✖️ Silence opposition legally
✅ Create pressure to “prove competence”
2/6 We analyzed all countries from 1980-2007 and found:
📈 Party-based and civilian autocracies have a higher propensity of conflict risk during emergencies
📊 Military/personalist regimes: No significant change
What explains this difference?
1/6 🚨 NEW RESEARCH: Authoritarian regimes under emergencies are more likely to start international conflicts, but only certain types of autocracies.
Read our new article with Reşat Bayer (Koc University) in @psrjournal.bsky.social here: doi.org/10.1177/1478... 🧵
A new publication is available in @ElectoralStdies. The study is about the interplay between the mass-elite ideological polarization congruence and democratic satisfaction in a multinational context. Gated link: shorturl.at/itM4f (1/11)