Finally receive the letter ✉️ from Japan 🇯🇵 and can make it official. I will stay at Waseda University in Tokyo during my sabbatical. Haven't visited East Asia for such a long while and so happy to spend my autumn in Tokyo 🗼. Thanks Tetsuro Kobayashi for the hosting and making this happen!

This paper was previously awarded the Best Paper Award in 2024 from @psaautocracy.bsky.social

Here are the award committee’s comments about the previous draft of this paper. Cheers 🥂

Overall, this article can bridge three strands of literature: (a) autocratization, (b) democratic attitudes, (c) transnational learning.

Like my recent publications and other works in my pipeline, this paper’s focus lies in the intersection of the three circles.

Another is benchmark effect: expecting SWD 📈. The benchmark effect can link to works on economic voting, Brexit, pandemic

One important resource that I use is De Vries’ book. The alternative state in the ref. country (autocratization) can serve as benchmark for citizens to evaluate their democracy

There are two effects we can think of for this research puzzle. One is contagion/domino effect: expecting SWD 📉 The theoretical underpinning can date back to Huntington’s seminal work “The Third Wave”

Key findings: Using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov metric, we find that opposition factions share similar economic attitudes. Yet, despite their cooperative behavior, they still hold divided attitudes on the center-periphery and democratization strategies dimensions.

Second, we launched an experiment🧪 to test whether this perception is mutable. We use an autocratization episode (i.e. trucker convoy) in which both mainstream parties engage in undemocratic behaviour (according to scholarly standards). Our findings demonstrate asymmetrical information updating

Our survey question in 🇨🇦 adopts the one from Global Party Survey (an expert survey) and asks citizens if they consider different parties respect democratic norms. In the paper, we describe why 🇨🇦 is a good case to study—a well-regarded democracy with a multi-party system. Our analysis has two steps.

We document anecdotes and scholarly evidence regarding how party labels itself as “democratic” and the out-party as “undemocratic”. Building on motivated reasoning literature, we expect this labelling process should affect citizens’ perceptions of whether different parties respect democratic norms

New Pub🚨 It is common for academics to evaluate whether parties are democratic or not. Yet, we know little about how citizens perceive a party’s commitment to democratic norms and whether these perceptions are vulnerable to change. This paper with Laura B. Stephenson sheds light on this topic 🧵

Last, there are lots of people to thank for giving valuable comments on this paper. I am truly late for arriving at the Blue Sky platform. If you are here, please feel free to add me.

The 2nd study is from the panel data @gles.bsky.social in 🇩🇪. This time, it is a within-subject design, which should be a harder test. Still, no matter the candidate vote or party vote, we see a drop in expressed support for FR.

Two studies provide support for this. The first study is from the LISS panel in 🇳🇱 It is an across-subject design using UESD (Unexpected Event during Survey Design). Yet, due to its panel data structure, there is an important twist that reviewers enjoy. No spoiler in this 🧵

Key argument📢 A far-right insurrection abroad can increase the salience of FR’s anti-democratic potential. Consequently, due to shaming and change in voting calculus, citizens are less prone to express support for FR.
Interested in the Google Trends Figure? More in the paper