Can reactionary leaders transform latent social divisions into political cleavages by mobilizing moral panics? I study the case of Phyllis Schlafly’s STOP-ERA campaign (1972–1982), which played a central role in organizing opposition to the Equal Rights Amendment in the United States. Using a newly constructed dataset on Schlafly’s appearances across U.S. counties, I exploit variation in campaign exposure to examine its impact on voting behavior and public opinion. Findings show that local exposure to the campaign increased Republican vote share, and shifted beliefs toward more anti-feminists sentiments. Analysis of the mechanism suggest that moral panics can contribute to the transformation of political cleavages by aligning cultural conservatism with partisan identity.
When Do Policy Narratives Translate into Costly Support? Evidence from Gender Quotas (with Luca Di Corato and Natalia Montinari)[Submitted]
Advocates of contested policies can justify them through alternative causal narratives of the problem the policy targets, yet little is known about when such narratives translate into costly behavioral engagement rather than mere stated approval. We argue that their effectiveness depends on the prior causal beliefs audiences hold. In a pre-registered experiment with 2,404 employed Italians recruited through a commercial online panel, using board gender quotas as a contested policy setting, we randomly expose participants to one of two alternative pro-quota rationales, one emphasizing demand-side barriers (discrimination and bias) and one emphasizing supply-side constraints (participation and confidence), or to an information-only condition describing the causes of gender inequality without reference to quotas. All treatments raise stated policy support, but none affects the decision to donate to an NGO promoting quotas. Conditional on donating, only the supply-side rationale raises donation amounts, and this effect is concentrated among respondents with diffuse prior causal beliefs. Individuals with well-defined causal beliefs are unresponsive, or react negatively, to information that departs from their priors. The effectiveness of policy communication thus depends not only on message content but on the precision and distribution of prior beliefs in the target population.
Misperceptions of social norms can sustain tolerance for coercive and controlling behaviours in intimate relationships. Using a preregistered online experiment with 3,900 young adults from Italy, Sweden and Romania, the study tests whether providing accurate information about peers’ attitudes shifts beliefs and policy preferences related to violence against women. Participants systematically overestimated peer acceptance of controlling behaviours. Corrective feedback reduced support for coercive options, particularly among men and those with larger initial biases. Effects on policy preferences were asymmetric—strengthening support for punitive measures while reducing perceived need for preventive or support-based interventions. Behavioural effects are limited but consistent with a shift toward greater willingness to support anti-violence initiatives.
Institutional legitimacy crises can weaken the ability of established authorities to shape social norms and may accelerate broader social and political change. When wrongdoing becomes publicly known—and is later met with formal acknowledgement or accountability—taken-for-granted norms can be contested, potentially reshaping beliefs, behavior, and participation in economic and civic life. To examine these dynamics, the study focuses on Ireland’s Magdalene Laundries, using two pivotal shocks: the 1993 public exposure of abuses and the Irish state’s 2013 apology. It constructs local exposure measures based on proximity to Laundry sites and estimates difference-in-differences models. The analysis aims to evaluate impacts on women’s socioeconomic outcomes (labor force participation and education) and on gender-related attitudes and political behavior, drawing on evidence from elections, referenda, and survey responses. Overall, the study focuses on how shocks to institutional legitimacy can shift norms and alter patterns of economic and political behavior.