Research
Working Papers
ABSTRACT: Framing remains a “fractured” paradigm marked by conceptual ambiguity and competing definitions. This paper revisits the canonical Expectancy Value (EV) model of emphasis framing, in an effort to bring empirical work closer to theory. Although foundational research pays close attention to framing mechanisms, few studies have directly measured respondents’ importance weights and consideration content. These core constructs of the EV model are observable, but go unmeasured in studies aimed at detecting average treatment effects (ATEs). To remedy this, I develop a theory of emphasis framing, and employ a novel within-subject design with a new approach to measuring importance weights that is more aligned with the EV model. A preregistered survey experiment illustrates the utility of my approach, showing that there is much to be learned about the effects of frames beyond their ATEs, given sufficient attention to theory. This work provides a productive path forward for emphasis framing research, and challenges the notion of an "end of framing."
ABSTRACT: The lack of a systematic measure of the ideological content of regulations has greatly limited research on the federal bureaucracy. Using the comments of Federal legislators on agencies’ proposed rules, we estimate the ideological location of 257 important and politically contested rules in DW-NOMINATE space, spanning 51 agencies over 20 years. This measure of rule content, included in a newly compiled dataset of comment text and hand-coded rule-level variables, reveals significant variation in the content of Federal regulations beyond what is captured by prior agency-level measures. Applying our measure to theoretical models of rulemaking, we find that the preferences of agencies, Congress, and especially the President, impact the ideological location of federal regulatory policy. Broadly, our measure enables more precise empirical study of the Federal bureaucracy than has been possible before, with implications for scholarship in several key areas like separation of powers, bureaucratic procedure, distributive politics, and agency discretion.
Essig, J. (2023) There's The Party: Preferences & Party Influence in The U.S House of Representatives. (PDF)*
*(This manuscript is actively being updated. Please do not cite without permission.)
ABSTRACT: The U.S. Congress is today almost unimaginable without parties, yet there is little direct evidence that parties systematically influence votes. Existing literature on party effects relies on analysis of roll call votes themselves, making it difficult to separate party influence from individual preferences. Using individual responses to Democratic House majority whip counts from 1955 to 1987, I reassess the evidence for party influence with additional data. I find strong evidence of party effects on voting, and quantify the consequences of using roll call votes to capture individual preferences. Roll call estimates of ideology fall short by overestimating members’ natural party loyalty, shifting ideological estimates to the extremes, and exaggerating the degree to which preferences alone drive voting behavior. Even in the less polarized historical period under study, members systematically change their positions in patterns consistent with party persuasion. These results caution against treating records of voting behavior as capturing preferences independent of institutional features.
Peer-Reviewed Publications
Manuscripts in Preparation
Essig, J., & Rothenberg, L. How Income Inequality Shapes Americans' Willingness to Pay for Climate Change Mitigation.
Essig, J. Measuring Beliefs in Political Psychology: Attitudes, Affect, or Information?
Essig, J. Facts vs. Feelings?: Framing, Information, and Emotion in Perceptions of the Economy.
Dissertation Summary: Opinion Formation & Change in American Politics
My dissertation contributes to our knowledge of preference formation, public opinion, legislator behavior, and political institutions within the field of American politics. My research employs a combination of theoretical and methodological approaches, from observational data, to political-psychological theory, to new survey experimental designs. On a broader level, it prompts communication between the behavioral and institutional subfields of American politics.
