MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1923546258 · doi:10.1111/ssqu.12046

The Lingering Effect of Scandals in Congressional Elections: Incumbents, Challengers, and Voters

2013· article· en· W1923546258 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Science Quarterly · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicElectoral Systems and Political Participation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurnoutMobilizationPolitical scienceVoter turnoutPoliticsMargin (machine learning)Political economyEconomicsLawVoting

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective We have two goals. First, we investigate both the short‐ and long‐term electoral impact of involvement in scandals on reelection margins of incumbents in U.S. congressional elections. Second, we evaluate the impact of scandals on district‐level turnout. Methods We model the impact of involvement in a political scandal on incumbents’ electoral margins in the election cycle in which the scandal comes to light, as well as in future election cycles. We also model the impact of scandal on district‐level turnout. Results Involvement in a scandal exerts not only an immediate, negative effect on incumbents’ margins, but one that also lingers beyond the initial reelection cycle. Elections involving incumbents embroiled in scandals experience a small boost in turnout. Conclusion In tandem, these results implicate the mobilization of previous nonvoters intent on “throwing the bum out” as one mechanism through which incumbent vote share is depressed in scandal elections.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.656
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.330 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it