With my journey through grad school continuing, I've successfully completed three research papers this semester for my proseminars on international politics, political modernization, and congressional politics. The fact that I enjoyed each class and conducting research for each proves just how much of a nerd I really am!
This latest round of papers I've completed encompass a variety of topics. In the first, I explore the relationship between foreign aid and immigration: is increasing foreign aid to a given country a viable strategy for curbing inflows of migrants? If so, foreign aid can serve as a valuable tool for policymakers who have to contend with constituent demands that immigration be reduced. Simultaneously, because foreign aid, in theory, would reduce immigration by improving prospects for employment and ensuring more secure household incomes in other countries, aid can be a more successful long-term strategy for reducing immigration since individuals are motivated to migrate when there is a lack of steady employment and livable wages.
"We'll Pay You to Stay Out: The Effect of Foreign Aid on Migrant Inflows" *
In the next paper, I take a look at why many Muslim majority countries struggle with democracy. Many often assume that Islam and democratic values are inherently opposed, and this is why many Islamic countries tend to be authoritarian. However, this perspective is overly simplistic, and many researchers have found compelling evidence that summarily dismisses any meaningful relationship between Islamic affiliation and democratic values. My own analysis suggests that the greater the level of religious tolerance in a country's citizenry, and the lower a citizenry's preference that religious leaders ought to be the ultimate authorities on the law, the greater the chance a country has of being a consolidated democracy. While many Islamic countries tend to struggle with both of these issues, Islam itself may not be entirely to blame. Factors such as how worried a citizenry is about its security, whether there is ample employment, and whether a country's history provides precedent for compromise and trust matter as well.
"Muslim Majorities and Democratic Consolidation: What's the Connection?"
In the final paper I examine whether there is a connection between engagement in online social media (such as Facebook and Twitter) and the rise in polarized hyper-partisanship that has recently become a notable feature of American politics. Evidence suggests that those with the most extreme ideological views tend to be most proactive when it comes to talking about, sharing, and engaging with politics online. Moreover, this online political behavior may in turn further entrench a given individual's political views due to the fact that people, in general, prefer to avoid being exposed to worldviews that don't jive with their own. The more dearly held and extreme an individual's ideology, the more an individual is likely to be motivated to take a defensive posture against discordant perspectives: thus, the more likely an individual is to participate in an "echo chamber" when they use social media. An echo chamber is basically a scenario in which likeminded people bounce their thoughts off of one another in a way that reaffirms and solidifies their worldview. While people have been behaving in this way for, essentially, forever, the introduction of social media may contribute to a heightening of echo chamber activity by making it much easier for likeminded people to meet and discuss issues.
"Divided We Stand: The Connection between Social Media Use and Deepening Partisan Divisions"
*An updated version of this paper was uploaded May 6th, 2016.
This latest round of papers I've completed encompass a variety of topics. In the first, I explore the relationship between foreign aid and immigration: is increasing foreign aid to a given country a viable strategy for curbing inflows of migrants? If so, foreign aid can serve as a valuable tool for policymakers who have to contend with constituent demands that immigration be reduced. Simultaneously, because foreign aid, in theory, would reduce immigration by improving prospects for employment and ensuring more secure household incomes in other countries, aid can be a more successful long-term strategy for reducing immigration since individuals are motivated to migrate when there is a lack of steady employment and livable wages.
"We'll Pay You to Stay Out: The Effect of Foreign Aid on Migrant Inflows" *
In the next paper, I take a look at why many Muslim majority countries struggle with democracy. Many often assume that Islam and democratic values are inherently opposed, and this is why many Islamic countries tend to be authoritarian. However, this perspective is overly simplistic, and many researchers have found compelling evidence that summarily dismisses any meaningful relationship between Islamic affiliation and democratic values. My own analysis suggests that the greater the level of religious tolerance in a country's citizenry, and the lower a citizenry's preference that religious leaders ought to be the ultimate authorities on the law, the greater the chance a country has of being a consolidated democracy. While many Islamic countries tend to struggle with both of these issues, Islam itself may not be entirely to blame. Factors such as how worried a citizenry is about its security, whether there is ample employment, and whether a country's history provides precedent for compromise and trust matter as well.
"Muslim Majorities and Democratic Consolidation: What's the Connection?"
In the final paper I examine whether there is a connection between engagement in online social media (such as Facebook and Twitter) and the rise in polarized hyper-partisanship that has recently become a notable feature of American politics. Evidence suggests that those with the most extreme ideological views tend to be most proactive when it comes to talking about, sharing, and engaging with politics online. Moreover, this online political behavior may in turn further entrench a given individual's political views due to the fact that people, in general, prefer to avoid being exposed to worldviews that don't jive with their own. The more dearly held and extreme an individual's ideology, the more an individual is likely to be motivated to take a defensive posture against discordant perspectives: thus, the more likely an individual is to participate in an "echo chamber" when they use social media. An echo chamber is basically a scenario in which likeminded people bounce their thoughts off of one another in a way that reaffirms and solidifies their worldview. While people have been behaving in this way for, essentially, forever, the introduction of social media may contribute to a heightening of echo chamber activity by making it much easier for likeminded people to meet and discuss issues.
"Divided We Stand: The Connection between Social Media Use and Deepening Partisan Divisions"
*An updated version of this paper was uploaded May 6th, 2016.
Comments
Post a Comment