Research & Projects

This paper challenges conventional accounts of political participation by showing that accessibility shapes not only whether citizens participate, but which forms of participation they pursue. Existing theories emphasize resources such as time, money, and civic skills. I identify accessibility as a distinct constraint: political activities vary in how compatible they are with citizens' physical, cognitive, temporal, and bureaucratic needs. I further show that disability identity shapes participation within accessible political venues by increasing both the expressive value of political action and the likelihood that individuals understand disability-related disadvantage as structural rather than individual. I demonstrate the manifestation of this through two different kinds of participation: unconventional (protests and boycotts) and a type of participation I coin as administrative participation. Administrative participation is seeking a benefit from the government or interacting with the bureaucracy in a way that shapes policy. This can be applied to welfare programs like STAMP or SSDI or disclosing an identity to the government such as filing an equal employment opportunity commission complaint. Through original and ANES data I find that disabled people protest and boycott more than nondisabled people. Those with higher disability identity are more likely than other disabled people to participate in these unconventional ways.

The Trump administration’s proposal of a national autism database has brought renewed attention to how marginalized groups navigate the disclosure of personal information to the government. While disclosure is often essential for accessing resources, it can carry risks of discrimination for individuals with stigmatized identities. Prior research shows that trust in government is a key driver of compliance, particularly in contexts such as tax reporting and public health during COVID-19. This paper uses autism as a case study to examine how trust in government shapes willingness to disclose information, particularly a marginalized identity. Drawing on the largest political sample of autistic adults to date (n = 887), I find that higher trust in government is associated with greater willingness to share an autism diagnosis with the state. This relationship is especially strong among autistic adults who require more support with daily activities. These findings highlight broader implications for state policies that depend on identity disclosure. When trust is low, particularly among those who are more vulnerable, mandated disclosure may deter participation and reinforce existing inequities. Autism disclosure offers an important lens into how marginalized individuals assess the risks and benefits of engaging with government institutions.

Public policy literature demonstrates that interactions with administrative institutions can serve as learning environments, shaping how individuals understand government, authority, and political systems. We extend this argument by examining whether students’ perceptions of university Student Disability Services (SDS) are associated with broader political attitudes. Using undergraduate survey data, we examine whether trust in SDS decision-making and perceptions of instructor accommodation follow-through are associated with trust in state and federal government, external political efficacy, and satisfaction with democracy. Results indicate that trust in SDS decision-making is positively related to all political outcomes, though perceptions of instructor follow-through show more nuanced associations. These findings suggest that university administrative experiences may provide politically consequential lessons about institutional legitimacy and responsiveness. We conclude with suggestions for improving university disability services and pedagogical recommendations for instructors.

This chapter is our third case study in The Handbook of Innovations in Political Psychology, which brings together other chapters in this section to understand how political communication can provide information for the development of citizens’ attitudes, as well as provide messages that can persuade them to change or bolster those attitudes. This specific case study will examine racial messaging and racial appeals in the U.S. context, including work on racial cues, priming, and appeals in the context of campaigns and elections in an increasingly diverse and polarized country.

Linked: Here

Registration rates for 16-,17-, and 18-year-olds in Maryland vary considerably by county. Rates are much higher in counties where a larger proportion of young people get a driver's license.

Linked: Here

67.4% of New Jersey Democrats support Vote 16 for school board elections and other findings from our statewide poll of New Jersey voters. This survey shows there is a large group of voters who support Vote 16 for some offices but not for others.

Linked: Here

U.S. elections impose unusually high informational and logistical burdens on voters (see e.g., Lijphart, 1997), and long lines operate as a de facto time tax that falls heaviest on some groups of people more than others (e.g., Stewart & Ansolabehere, 2013). This white paper advances a case for incorporating food into election spaces as an effective way to lessen the democratic damage of waiting. Drawing on scholarship in election administration, accounts of historical election culture, contemporary field experiments on “election festivals,” and social psychology and physiology research on eating and affiliation, the review synthesizes two claims. First, food provides immediate physiological and affective support that can reduce line abandonment. Second, food brings people together. When people eat or share food, it helps them feel connected, trust each other more, and enjoy the experience. Food can turn waiting in line from something boring and bureaucratic into a shared, positive community moment. Evidence from recent randomized trials indicates that festive, food-centered events can increase participation, especially at early-voting sites. A brief comparative glance at Australia’s “democracy sausage” illustrates how food can normalize elections as convivial public rituals. Taken together, the historical record, experimental evidence, and social-behavioral mechanisms support a clear conclusion: feeding people in and around voting lines is not gimmickry but democratic care. Rather than being merely a pleasant accompaniment to social life, food acts as a social lubricant, lowering barriers, building trust, and creating an immediate sense of affiliation. 

Linked: Here