@article{GattoGohdesTraberetal., author = {Gatto, Malu A. C. and Gohdes, Anita R. and Traber, Denise and van der Velden, Mariken A. C. G.}, title = {Selecting in or Selecting Out? Gender Gaps and Political Methodology in Europe}, series = {PS: Political Science \& Politics}, volume = {53}, journal = {PS: Political Science \& Politics}, number = {1}, doi = {10.1017/S1049096519001288}, pages = {122 -- 127}, abstract = {Studies investigating gender gaps in the doctoral training of political science students have focused so far overwhelmingly on the US context. Although important research within this context has made strides in identifying the persistent challenges to women's incorporation in political methodology, much remains unknown about whether women and men have different experiences in methods training during their PhD programs. We contribute to this debate by analyzing data from an original survey on the methods-training experiences of political science PhD students at different European universities. We assess whether gender gaps exist with respect to PhD students' methods training and confidence in employing methods skills. Our findings show that women cover significantly fewer methods courses in their doctoral training. When women do participate in methods training, they show levels of method employment similar to their male colleagues. We discuss the implications of these findings in the context of European doctoral training.}, language = {en} } @article{CareyGohdes, author = {Carey, Sabine C. and Gohdes, Anita R.}, title = {Understanding Journalist Killings}, series = {The Journal of Politics}, journal = {The Journal of Politics}, issn = {1468-2508}, doi = {10.1086/715172}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-40799}, abstract = {Why do state authorities murder journalists? We show that the majority of journalists are killed in democracies and present an argument that focuses on institutional differences between democratic states. In democracies, journalists will most likely be targeted by local state authorities that have limited options to generally restrict press freedom. Where local governments are elected, negative reporting could mean that local politicians lose power and influence, especially if they are involved in corrupt practices. Analyzing new global data on journalist killings that identify the perpetrator and visibility of the journalist, we show that local-level elections carry an inherent risk, particularly for less visible journalists. Killings perpetrated by criminal groups follow a similar pattern to those by state authorities, pointing to possible connections between these groups. Our study shows that without effective monitoring and accountability, national democratic institutions alone are unable to effectively protect journalists from any perpetrator.}, language = {en} } @article{MunzertSelbGohdesetal., author = {Munzert, Simon and Selb, Peter and Gohdes, Anita R. and Stoetzer, Lukas F. and Lowe, Will}, title = {Tracking and Promoting Usage of a COVID-19 Contact Tracing App.}, series = {Nature Human Behavior}, journal = {Nature Human Behavior}, number = {5}, doi = {10.1038/s41562-020-01044-x}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/2397-3374}, pages = {247 -- 255}, abstract = {Digital contact tracing apps have been introduced globally as an instrument to contain the COVID-19 pandemic. Yet, privacy by design impedes both the evaluation of these tools and the deployment of evidence-based interventions to stimulate uptake. We combine an online panel survey with mobile tracking data to measure the actual usage of Germany's official contact tracing app and reveal higher uptake rates among respondents with an increased risk of severe illness, but lower rates among those with a heightened risk of exposure to COVID-19. Using a randomized intervention, we show that informative and motivational video messages have very limited effect on uptake. However, findings from a second intervention suggest that even small monetary incentives can strongly increase uptake and help make digital contact tracing a more effective tool.}, language = {en} } @article{BrigdenGohdes, author = {Brigden, Noelle K. and Gohdes, Anita R.}, title = {The Politics of Data Access in Studying Violence across Methodological Boundaries: What We Can Learn from Each Other?}, series = {International Studies Review}, volume = {22}, journal = {International Studies Review}, number = {2}, issn = {1468-2486}, doi = {10.1093/isr/viaa017}, pages = {250 -- 267}, abstract = {In this article, we investigate where the ethics of data collection and access of two widely disparate methodological approaches studying violence intersect, and we explore how these respective intellectual communities can learn from each other. We compare and contrast the research strategies and dilemmas confronted by researchers using quantitative methods to collect and analyze "big data" and those by researchers conducting interpretivist ethnography grounded in the method of participant observation. The shared context of participant vulnerability produces overlapping concerns about our work. With shifts in quantitative conflict research to examine the microdynamics of violence, quandaries of confidentiality and the ethics of exposure have become increasingly salient. At the same time, ethical dilemmas that arise in the large-scale collection of data offer important points of reflection regarding the ethics of participant observation as it is performed in ethnographic research. Instead of focusing on areas of disagreement, we suggest that interpretivist fieldworkers and quantitative researchers can learn from how the politics of information materialize across divergent research methods.}, language = {en} } @article{OttoScharpfGohdes, author = {Otto, Sabine and Scharpf, Adam and Gohdes, Anita R.}, title = {Capturing Group Alignments: Introducing the Government and Armed Actors Relations Dataset (GAARD)}, series = {Research and Politics}, volume = {7}, journal = {Research and Politics}, number = {4}, doi = {10.1177/2053168020971891}, pages = {8}, abstract = {Recent research has generated important new insights into the existence, behavior, and violent consequences of armed actors in civil wars. However, the lack of suitable information on actor relationships with the state means that studies have been forced to assume that armed groups are either pro-government or anti-government and remain that way for the duration of their existence. Both assumptions severely limit our understanding of the armed actors themselves, as well as the violent dynamics they produce. This article introduces the Government and Armed Actors Relations Dataset (GAARD), which provides detailed information on all major armed groups and their fluctuating alignment with the state between 1989 and 2007. GAARD identifies when armed groups fight with or against the government, and when they lack relationships with the government altogether. It further provides information on all changes in group alignments and documents when and how these occurred. We demonstrate that more than 25\% of armed groups changed their alignments and showcase how this allows researchers to pursue original research on the drivers, dynamics, and outcomes of civil conflicts.}, language = {en} } @article{Gohdes, author = {Gohdes, Anita R.}, title = {Repression technology: Internet accessibility and state violence}, series = {American Journal of Political Science}, volume = {64}, journal = {American Journal of Political Science}, number = {3}, issn = {1540-5907}, doi = {10.1111/ajps.12509}, pages = {488 -- 503}, abstract = {This article offers a first subnational analysis of the relationship between states' dynamic control of Internet access and their use of violent repression. I argue that where governments provide Internet access, surveillance of digital information exchange can provide intelligence that enables the use of more targeted forms of repression, in particular in areas not fully controlled by the regime. Increasing restrictions on Internet accessibility can impede opposition organization, but they limit access to information on precise targets, resulting in an increase in untargeted repression. I present new data on killings in the Syrian conflict that distinguish between targeted and untargeted events, using supervised text classification. I find that higher levels of Internet accessibility are associated with increases in targeted repression, whereas areas with limited access experience more indiscriminate campaigns of violence. The results offer important implications on how governments incorporate the selective access to communication technology into their strategies of coercion.}, language = {en} } @incollection{GohdesSteinertThrelkeld, author = {Gohdes, Anita R. and Steinert Threlkeld, Zachary C.}, title = {Changing Sources: Social Media Activity During Civil War}, series = {Digital Activism and Authoritarian Adaptation in the Middle East}, booktitle = {Digital Activism and Authoritarian Adaptation in the Middle East}, edition = {POMEPS Studies 43}, address = {Stanford}, publisher = {Hertie School}, pages = {103 -- 109}, language = {en} } @incollection{PriceGohdes, author = {Price, Megan and Gohdes, Anita R.}, title = {The Promises and Pitfalls of Data Analysis for Accountability and Justice}, series = {Accountability and Transitional Justice in a Postconflict Society}, booktitle = {Accountability and Transitional Justice in a Postconflict Society}, editor = {Ziadeh, Radwan}, publisher = {The Rowman \& Littlefield Publishing Group, Inc.}, address = {London}, isbn = {9781498511896}, publisher = {Hertie School}, pages = {109 -- 120}, language = {en} } @article{MunzertRamirezRuizCalıetal., author = {Munzert, Simon and Ramirez-Ruiz, Sebastian and {\c{C}}al{\i}, Ba{\c{s}}ak and Stoetzer, Lukas F. and Gohdes, Anita R. and Lowe, Will}, title = {Prioritization preferences for COVID-19 vaccination are consistent across five countries}, series = {Humanities and Social Sciences Communications}, volume = {9}, journal = {Humanities and Social Sciences Communications}, number = {439}, doi = {10.1057/s41599-022-01392-1}, abstract = {Vaccination against COVID-19 is making progress globally, but vaccine doses remain a rare commodity in many parts of the world. New virus variants require vaccines to be updated, hampering the availability of effective vaccines. Policymakers have defined criteria to regulate who gets priority access to the vaccination, such as age, health complications, or those who hold system-relevant jobs. But how does the public think about vaccine allocation? To explore those preferences, we surveyed respondents in Brazil, Germany, Italy, Poland, and the United States from September to December of 2020 using ranking and forced-choice tasks. We find that public preferences are consistent with expert guidelines prioritizing health-care workers and people with medical preconditions. However, the public also considers those signing up early for vaccination and citizens of the country to be more deserving than later-comers and non-citizens. These results hold across measures, countries, and socio-demographic subgroups.}, language = {en} } @article{StoetzerMunzertLoweetal., author = {Stoetzer, Lukas F. and Munzert, Simon and Lowe, Will and {\c{C}}al{\i}, Ba{\c{s}}ak and Gohdes, Anita R. and Helbling, Marc and Maxwell, Rahsaan and Traunm{\"u}ller, Richard}, title = {Affective partisan polarization and moral dilemmas during the COVID-19 pandemic}, series = {Political Science Research and Methods}, journal = {Political Science Research and Methods}, doi = {10.1017/psrm.2022.13}, pages = {1 -- 8}, abstract = {Recent scholarship on affective polarization documents partisan animosity in people's everyday lives. But does partisan dislike go so far as to deny fundamental rights? We study this question through a moral dilemma that gained notoriety during the COVID-19 pandemic: triage decisions on the allocation of intensive medical care. Using a conjoint experiment in five countries we analyze the influence of patients' partisanship next to commonly discussed factors determining access to intensive medical care. We find that while participants' choices are consistent with a utilitarian heuristic, revealed partisanship influences decisions across most countries. Supporters of left or right political camps are more likely to withhold support from partisan opponents. Our findings offer comparative evidence on affective polarization in non-political contexts.}, language = {en} } @article{HenryGohdesDorff, author = {Henry, Colin and Gohdes, Anita R. and Dorff, Cassy}, title = {Digital Footprints and Data Security Risks for Political Scientists}, series = {PS: Political Science \& Politics}, volume = {55}, journal = {PS: Political Science \& Politics}, number = {4}, doi = {10.1017/S1049096522000543}, pages = {804 -- 808}, abstract = {As greater shares of research and data are digitized, political scientists are increasingly confronted with questions pertaining to data security. Yet, data-management plans rarely evaluate the risks pertaining to a researcher's data across all project phases. This article highlights distinct risks related to key phases of the research process that deserve more attention by scholars. We emphasize risks during a project's inception and pre-data-collection phases, as well as risks associated with data publication and its afterlife. We discuss how shifts in political context and (re)newed politicization of topics can present new security risks for both the researcher and the researched communities long after a project has been completed. We provide a framework for recognizing and mitigating data risks, thereby contributing to the growing interest in data-security best practices.}, language = {en} } @book{Gohdes, author = {Gohdes, Anita R.}, title = {Repression in the Digital Age: Surveillance, Censorship, and the Dynamics of State Violence}, publisher = {Oxford University Press}, isbn = {9780197743577}, publisher = {Hertie School}, pages = {200}, language = {en} } @article{BarberaGohdesIakhnisetal., author = {Barber{\´a}, Pablo and Gohdes, Anita R. and Iakhnis, Evgeniia and Zeitzoff, Thomas}, title = {Distract and divert: How world leaders use social media during contentious politics}, series = {The International Journal of Press/Politics}, volume = {29}, journal = {The International Journal of Press/Politics}, number = {1}, doi = {10.1177/19401612221102030}, pages = {47 -- 73}, abstract = {How do leaders communicate during domestic crises? We provide the first global analysis of world leader communication on social media during social unrest. We develop a theory of leaders' digital communication strategies, building on the diversionary theory of foreign policy, as well as research on the role of democratic institutions in explaining elite responsiveness. To test our theory, we construct a new dataset that characterizes leader communication through social media posts published by any head of state or government on Twitter or Facebook, employing a combination of automated translation and supervised machine learning methods. Our findings show that leaders increase their social media activity and shift the topic from domestic to foreign policy issues during moments of social unrest, which is consistent with a conscious strategy to divert public attention when their position could be at risk. These effects are larger in democracies and in particular in the run-up to elections, which we attribute to incentives created by democratic institutions. Our results demonstrate how social media provide meaningful comparative insight into leaders' political behavior in the digital age.}, language = {en} }