Election Hearing Board
Election Shared Governance Review
Election Grievance Clearinghouse
Election Senate Executive Committee
Classified Staff Council
Promotion and Tenure
College of Education
College of Fine Arts
College of Architecture, Planning and Landscape Architecture
Governor's decision on the budget
Disability Resource Center (DRC)
Constitution & Bylaws Revisions
mail or electronic ballots
an electronic ballot
Animal And Biomedical Industries BS
Course Syllabus Policy
Alternative Grade System of S/P/C/D/E With S/P/F
UA Inclusive Excellence Statement
Teacher Course Evaluation
Office of Instruction and Assessment
MetadataShow full item record
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
Trends in Recent United States Senate Elections: Incumbency, Finance, Gender and RaceBrown, Jason (The University of Arizona., 2012-05)Though Senate elections are less studied than their House equivalency, there is still significant evidence that explains various trends occurring in the upper chamber of Congress in the past several decades. The Senate, like the House, falls victim to various biases including gender and race. In addition, there is an incumbency advantage in the Senate that proves almost as significant as in House competitions. Despite these similarities, there are noteworthy disparities between House and Senate elections, many of which stem from the differences in term lengths and magnitude of constituencies. However, there are political scientists who believe the electoral outcomes are quite similar, despite these fundamental differences. One of the main contentions is the significance of House and Senate races as a referendum on the president. While it may be more noteworthy in House competitions, it certainly is influential in the Senate. A significant facet of Senate elections studied extensively is the amount of funds needed to win the race. It should be no surprise that a significant majority of winners in the 20 I 0 Senate race far outspent their competitors. There are several elections, however, where this proved false and the candidate with lesser funds defeated his Or her competitor.
Social Desirability Bias in the 2016 Presidential ElectionKlar, Samara; Weber, Christopher R.; Krupnikov, Yanna; Univ Arizona (WALTER DE GRUYTER GMBH, 2016-01-01)Partisanship is a stable trait but expressions of partisan preferences can vary according to social context. When particular preferences become socially undesirable, some individuals refrain from expressing them in public, even in relatively anonymous settings such as surveys and polls. In this study, we rely on the psychological trait of self-monitoring to show that Americans who are more likely to adjust their behaviors to comply with social norms (i.e. high self-monitors) were less likely to express support for Donald Trump during the 2016 Presidential Election. In turn, as self-monitoring decreases, we find that the tendency to express support for Trump increases. This study suggests that - at least for some individuals - there may have been a tendency in 2016 to repress expressed support for Donald Trump in order to mask socially undesirable attitudes.