Asahi Obata

The Effect of the Americans with Disabilities Act on the Political Efficacy of Persons with Disabilities

How did the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), a civil rights law enacted in 1990, affect the political efficacy of persons with disabilities? Existing studies have shown that persons with disabilities tend to exhibit lower levels of political efficacy and are less likely to participate in politics. However, little is known about the factors that influence political efficacy within this population. I argue that external political efficacy among persons with disabilities was higher in the pre-ADA period than in the post-ADA period, while levels of internal political efficacy remained unchanged. I attribute this shift to changes in political mobilization within the disability community following the ADA’s enactment. To test this hypothesis, I analyze data from the American National Election Studies (ANES). The results support the hypothesis: while having a disability had no significant effect on external political efficacy in the pre-ADA period, it is associated with a decline in external political efficacy in the post-ADA period.

Disability and Political Behavior:
Focusing on the effect of being denied disability benefits

When persons with disabilities are denied disability benefits, does it affect their willingness to vote and their attitudes toward political parties? While existing studies show that persons with disabilities vote at lower rates, they have not empirically examined the mechanisms underlying this pattern. I argue that being denied disability benefits reduces external political efficacy, the belief that the government is responsive to one’s needs, as well as political trust. These effects, in turn, lead to lower electoral turnout among individuals who apply for but are denied disability benefits. I test this theoretical argument using an original online survey of persons with disabilities in the United States.

Attack Advertising and Political Participation in the Social Media Era 

with Agustin Prinetti and Randolph T. Stevenson

How does the effect of attack advertising on voter turnout vary depending on the platform through which citizens are exposed to such content? Building on the seminal work of Ansolabehere et al. (1994), which found that attack advertising demobilizes voters by fostering cynicism toward elected officials and the electoral process, we identify conditions under which this effect may be amplified or diminished.  We hypothesize that the demobilizing effect of attack advertising will be weaker when the content is encountered on X (formerly Twitter), a platform associated with frequent attack ads and a high volume of political content, compared to Instagram, which is less commonly associated with such content. To test this theory, we conduct an immersive experiment in which participants are exposed to mock-up timelines designed to simulate user experiences on either X or Instagram.