Journal Article10.1177/20531680231194805
Expert opinions and negative externalities do not decrease support for anti-price gouging policies
Casey Klofstad,Joseph E. Uscinski +1 more
- 01 Jul 2023
2
TL;DR: Anti-price gouging policies enjoy widespread support despite potential negative externalities and expert opposition.
read more
Abstract: During disasters, citizens call for “anti-price gouging” policies. However, majorities of economists oppose such policies. For democracy to function, citizens should be responsive to policy-relevant information—especially from experts. What impact does exposure to the potential negative externalities have on public support for anti-price gouging policies? We hypothesize that if the public were exposed to such information, they would be less supportive of anti-gouging policies. We employ two survey experiments: one administered in Florida ( n = 2085), a state prone to hurricane activity, and the second in the United States ( n = 2023) at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Both show that the public overwhelmingly supports anti-price gouging policies, regardless of exposure to information about negative externalities, even when it comes from experts.
read more
Chat with Paper
AI Agents for this Paper
Find similar papers on Google Scholar, PubMed and Arxiv
Write a critical review of this paper
Analyze citations of this paper to find unaddressed research gaps
Citations
The effect of experts on attitude change in public-facing political science: Scientific communication on term limits in the United States.
Aaron Mitchell Houck,Aaron S. King,J. B. Taylor +2 more
TL;DR: Scientific expert messengers and messages can significantly change public attitudes in areas where knowledge is based on a non-ideological misperception.
Regulating Misinformation: Political Irrationality as a Feasibility Constraint
Bartek Chomanski
TL;DR: This paper argues that governments should abandon attempts to regulate misinformation due to political irrationality, as debunking and source labeling interventions are likely to be processed irrationally, rendering them ineffective and futile.
References
The case for motivated reasoning.
TL;DR: It is proposed that motivation may affect reasoning through reliance on a biased set of cognitive processes--that is, strategies for accessing, constructing, and evaluating beliefs--that are considered most likely to yield the desired conclusion.
•Book
What Americans Know about Politics and Why It Matters
Michael X. Delli Carpini,Scott Keeter +1 more
- 27 Mar 1996
TL;DR: Carpini and Keeter as mentioned in this paper found that whites, men, and older, financially secure citizens have substantially more knowledge about national politics than do blacks, women, young adults, and financially less-well-off citizens.
4.9K
•Book
The Democratic Dilemma: Can Citizens Learn What They Need to Know?
Arthur Lupia,Mathew D. McCubbins +1 more
- 13 Mar 1998
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a survey on the conditions for persuasion in information, persuasion and choice, and a survey of the institutions of knowledge and the foundation of democracy in the US.
1.9K
The Democratic Dilemma: Can Citizens Learn What They Need To Know? Political Economy of Institutions and Decisions Series.
Arthur Lupia,Mathew D. McCubbins +1 more
- 01 Jan 1998
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present a survey on the conditions for persuasion in information, persuasion and choice, and a survey of the institutions of knowledge and the foundation of democracy in the US.
993
•Book
The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies
Bryan Caplan
- 01 Jan 2007
TL;DR: The Myth of Rational Voter as discussed by the authors argues that voters continually elect politicians who either share their biases or else pretend to, resulting in bad policies winning again and again by popular demand, and argues that democracy fails precisely because it does what voters want.
980