George Melios
@gmelios.bsky.social
Working on the intersection of econ, polsci and behavioural science. Applying causal inference to study what people believe and how they behave. Currently at LSE and RHUL
Really excited to present this work at @apsgworkshop.bsky.social, among a fantastic lineup of papers!
On February 24, @gmelios.bsky.social (LSE) will present "Propaganda, party mobilisation and Electoral Oppression". @felixhaass.bsky.social (Humboldt), @serkant.bsky.social (Sabancı), & @sofiavasilopoulou.bsky.social (@kingscollegelondon.bsky.social) will comment.
January 19, 2026 at 5:09 PM
Really excited to present this work at @apsgworkshop.bsky.social, among a fantastic lineup of papers!
Read the full paper here 👉 papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf…
And see the coverage by @kingscollegelondon.bsky.social:t.co/N4kE3L0mXl
And see the coverage by @kingscollegelondon.bsky.social:t.co/N4kE3L0mXl
https://www.kcl.ac.uk/news/study-finds-well-designed-benefits-dont-discourage-people-from-working
t.co
September 27, 2025 at 10:31 AM
Read the full paper here 👉 papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf…
And see the coverage by @kingscollegelondon.bsky.social:t.co/N4kE3L0mXl
And see the coverage by @kingscollegelondon.bsky.social:t.co/N4kE3L0mXl
Interpretation:
Well-designed, work-neutral disability benefits do not reduce labor market participation.
The small positive effects under strict assessors likely reflect filtering out strategic claims, not large behavioral responses.
Well-designed, work-neutral disability benefits do not reduce labor market participation.
The small positive effects under strict assessors likely reflect filtering out strategic claims, not large behavioral responses.
September 27, 2025 at 10:31 AM
Interpretation:
Well-designed, work-neutral disability benefits do not reduce labor market participation.
The small positive effects under strict assessors likely reflect filtering out strategic claims, not large behavioral responses.
Well-designed, work-neutral disability benefits do not reduce labor market participation.
The small positive effects under strict assessors likely reflect filtering out strategic claims, not large behavioral responses.
📊 Results:
•Expanding access (mental health) → no reduction in employment, if anything small positive effects
•Restricting access (minor physical disabilities) → no gains in employment
•Stricter assessors → small but significant ↑ in employment
•Expanding access (mental health) → no reduction in employment, if anything small positive effects
•Restricting access (minor physical disabilities) → no gains in employment
•Stricter assessors → small but significant ↑ in employment
September 27, 2025 at 10:31 AM
📊 Results:
•Expanding access (mental health) → no reduction in employment, if anything small positive effects
•Restricting access (minor physical disabilities) → no gains in employment
•Stricter assessors → small but significant ↑ in employment
•Expanding access (mental health) → no reduction in employment, if anything small positive effects
•Restricting access (minor physical disabilities) → no gains in employment
•Stricter assessors → small but significant ↑ in employment
Using UK panel data (2009–2019) & quasi-experimental variation from the DLA→PIP reform, we estimate employment effects for:
•Mental health conditions (gained eligibility)
•Minor physical disabilities (lost eligibility)
•Regions with stricter vs lenient assessors
•Mental health conditions (gained eligibility)
•Minor physical disabilities (lost eligibility)
•Regions with stricter vs lenient assessors
September 27, 2025 at 10:31 AM
Using UK panel data (2009–2019) & quasi-experimental variation from the DLA→PIP reform, we estimate employment effects for:
•Mental health conditions (gained eligibility)
•Minor physical disabilities (lost eligibility)
•Regions with stricter vs lenient assessors
•Mental health conditions (gained eligibility)
•Minor physical disabilities (lost eligibility)
•Regions with stricter vs lenient assessors
PIP is unique. It covers the extra costs of disability but has no earnings tests & no work incapacity requirements. This design lets us isolate pure income effects without substitution distortions.
September 27, 2025 at 10:31 AM
PIP is unique. It covers the extra costs of disability but has no earnings tests & no work incapacity requirements. This design lets us isolate pure income effects without substitution distortions.
Most disability benefits combine income support + work restrictions. That makes it hard to know: do people work less because they can, or because policy forces them not to?
September 27, 2025 at 10:31 AM
Most disability benefits combine income support + work restrictions. That makes it hard to know: do people work less because they can, or because policy forces them not to?
🚨 New working paper alert!
As part of our Horizon Europe BENEFITS project, @bkleinteeselink.bsky.social and I study whether disability benefits necessarily discourage work — using the UK’s Personal Independence Payment (PIP) reform as a natural experiment.
🧵
As part of our Horizon Europe BENEFITS project, @bkleinteeselink.bsky.social and I study whether disability benefits necessarily discourage work — using the UK’s Personal Independence Payment (PIP) reform as a natural experiment.
🧵
September 27, 2025 at 10:31 AM
🚨 New working paper alert!
As part of our Horizon Europe BENEFITS project, @bkleinteeselink.bsky.social and I study whether disability benefits necessarily discourage work — using the UK’s Personal Independence Payment (PIP) reform as a natural experiment.
🧵
As part of our Horizon Europe BENEFITS project, @bkleinteeselink.bsky.social and I study whether disability benefits necessarily discourage work — using the UK’s Personal Independence Payment (PIP) reform as a natural experiment.
🧵
Available at www.cambridge.org/core/journal...
“Sleeping with the enemy”: partisanship and tolerance in online dating | Political Science Research and Methods | Cambridge Core
“Sleeping with the enemy”: partisanship and tolerance in online dating
www.cambridge.org
September 5, 2025 at 11:52 AM
Available at www.cambridge.org/core/journal...
Takeaway: politics matters in private life—but signaling openness can bridge divides. Surfacing “tolerance” on platforms might reduce partisan sorting
September 5, 2025 at 11:52 AM
Takeaway: politics matters in private life—but signaling openness can bridge divides. Surfacing “tolerance” on platforms might reduce partisan sorting
Gender splits: Men penalized “progressive” profiles; women rewarded them. Women also showed a stronger in‑party preference than men
September 5, 2025 at 11:52 AM
Gender splits: Men penalized “progressive” profiles; women rewarded them. Women also showed a stronger in‑party preference than men
Counter‑stereotypes: Conservatives were more open to out‑partisans who defied stereotypes (e.g., White/Traditional/Non‑veg Labour). Labour respondents tended to prefer stereotypical Tories—except they liked progressive Tories
September 5, 2025 at 11:52 AM
Counter‑stereotypes: Conservatives were more open to out‑partisans who defied stereotypes (e.g., White/Traditional/Non‑veg Labour). Labour respondents tended to prefer stereotypical Tories—except they liked progressive Tories
But tolerance is even stronger. Profiles saying “open to match with anyone” gained +19.9 pp—the largest effect; similar in size to being attractive. It’s not just avoiding “No Tories/No Labour” profiles. Even among co‑partisans, people preferred tolerant over intolerant profiles
September 5, 2025 at 11:52 AM
But tolerance is even stronger. Profiles saying “open to match with anyone” gained +19.9 pp—the largest effect; similar in size to being attractive. It’s not just avoiding “No Tories/No Labour” profiles. Even among co‑partisans, people preferred tolerant over intolerant profiles
Headline: Co‑partisanship is powerful. Co‑partisan profiles were picked +18.2 pp more often than out‑partisans
September 5, 2025 at 11:52 AM
Headline: Co‑partisanship is powerful. Co‑partisan profiles were picked +18.2 pp more often than out‑partisans
We ran a visual conjoint with 3,000 UK daters (18–40). Profiles varied party (Labour/Tory), a clear “tolerance” cue, ideology, race, education, diet, height, and facial attractiveness—using real photos to mirror apps
September 5, 2025 at 11:52 AM
We ran a visual conjoint with 3,000 UK daters (18–40). Profiles varied party (Labour/Tory), a clear “tolerance” cue, ideology, race, education, diet, height, and facial attractiveness—using real photos to mirror apps
🚨📢 New paper out in @psrm.bsky.social with Yara Sleiman & Paul Dolan: “Sleeping with the enemy: partisanship and tolerance in online dating”. How much do politics shape who we swipe?
September 5, 2025 at 11:52 AM
🚨📢 New paper out in @psrm.bsky.social with Yara Sleiman & Paul Dolan: “Sleeping with the enemy: partisanship and tolerance in online dating”. How much do politics shape who we swipe?
Reposted by George Melios
Just out! ERNOP's practitioner summary of my paper with @gmelios.bsky.social, showing that 🇺🇸 Partisans reduce charitable giving by ~4.5 % when their own party is in power, as faith in government crowds out private help, whereas opposition to government motivates private giving.
tinyurl.com/ernop1
tinyurl.com/ernop1
ernop.eu
June 30, 2025 at 8:58 AM
Just out! ERNOP's practitioner summary of my paper with @gmelios.bsky.social, showing that 🇺🇸 Partisans reduce charitable giving by ~4.5 % when their own party is in power, as faith in government crowds out private help, whereas opposition to government motivates private giving.
tinyurl.com/ernop1
tinyurl.com/ernop1
An interesting collection of opinions @theguardian.com on whether and how the 2020 BLM protests change the world. Covers our work with @bkleinteeselink.bsky.social on @polbehavior.bsky.social. Link on the first comment
How did 2020’s Black Lives Matter movement change the world? Our panel responds
How did 2020’s Black Lives Matter movement change the world? Our panel responds
Five years ago, George Floyd was murdered by a police officer in Minneapolis. Writers and activists from Brazil to Berlin talk about the protests, hope and disappointment that followed
www.theguardian.com
May 29, 2025 at 1:15 PM
An interesting collection of opinions @theguardian.com on whether and how the 2020 BLM protests change the world. Covers our work with @bkleinteeselink.bsky.social on @polbehavior.bsky.social. Link on the first comment
New paper out in @polbehavior.bsky.social. We focus on an important and timely question. Do protests matter? Do they drive social change? @bkleinteeselink.bsky.social summarises our work nicely in the following thread.
1/ 📣 PUBLICATION ALERT: Our paper on the effect of BLM protests on the 2020 presidential election has been published in @polbehavior.bsky.social ! Joint work with my great friend and co-author @gmelios.bsky.social
#Polisky #Econsky
#Polisky #Econsky
March 4, 2025 at 4:06 PM
New paper out in @polbehavior.bsky.social. We focus on an important and timely question. Do protests matter? Do they drive social change? @bkleinteeselink.bsky.social summarises our work nicely in the following thread.
Great summary of our paper!
Great blog about our recently published paper with @gmelios.bsky.social!
Our research suggests that current Republicans’ efforts to dismantle government agencies might spur rising Democratic donations to support charities providing those services.
www.kcl.ac.uk/news/people-...
#EconSky #PoliSky
Our research suggests that current Republicans’ efforts to dismantle government agencies might spur rising Democratic donations to support charities providing those services.
www.kcl.ac.uk/news/people-...
#EconSky #PoliSky
People who oppose party in power 'donate significantly more to charity'
A new study has revealed that political party loyalty has a significant impact on charitable giving, as Americans donate considerably more money to charity when they oppose the party in power, while r...
www.kcl.ac.uk
February 14, 2025 at 2:24 PM
Great summary of our paper!
Very excited to be in Vienna yesterday for the kick-off meeting of our new Horizon Europe grant "MultiPod" on promoting political participation and creating the "Public Space for Citizen Deliberation" in Europe!
December 10, 2024 at 10:18 AM
Very excited to be in Vienna yesterday for the kick-off meeting of our new Horizon Europe grant "MultiPod" on promoting political participation and creating the "Public Space for Citizen Deliberation" in Europe!
Check out our new publication. Excellently summarised by @bkleinteeselink.bsky.social
🎉 Publication alert, joint with @gmelios.bsky.social!
Our paper examines how alignment with the government affects charitable giving. It has just been accepted in Public Choice.
Find out about our findings below!
Our paper examines how alignment with the government affects charitable giving. It has just been accepted in Public Choice.
Find out about our findings below!
November 13, 2024 at 10:58 AM
Check out our new publication. Excellently summarised by @bkleinteeselink.bsky.social
Thanks to @bkleinteeselink.bsky.social for the great collaboration on this project. Looking forward to continuing this line of research! #PoliticalScience #Polarization #AmericanPolitics
September 18, 2024 at 10:48 AM
Thanks to @bkleinteeselink.bsky.social for the great collaboration on this project. Looking forward to continuing this line of research! #PoliticalScience #Polarization #AmericanPolitics
Why do these findings matter? A lack of trust in government when the "other side" is in power can hinder democratic functioning. It makes it harder for citizens to hold their own party accountable and can lead to efforts to undermine opposing governments. 🏛️
September 18, 2024 at 10:47 AM
Why do these findings matter? A lack of trust in government when the "other side" is in power can hinder democratic functioning. It makes it harder for citizens to hold their own party accountable and can lead to efforts to undermine opposing governments. 🏛️