@book{MunzertRubbaMeissneretal., author = {Munzert, Simon and Rubba, Christian and Meißner, Peter and Nyhuis, Dominic}, title = {Automated Data Collection with R: A Practical Guide to Web Scraping and Text Mining}, publisher = {John Wiley \& Sons}, address = {Chichester}, isbn = {978-1-118-83481-7}, doi = {10.1002/9781118834732}, publisher = {Hertie School}, pages = {474}, abstract = {A hands on guide to web scraping and text mining for both beginners and experienced users of R Introduces fundamental concepts of the main architecture of the web and databases and covers HTTP, HTML, XML, JSON, SQL. Provides basic techniques to query web documents and data sets (XPath and regular expressions). An extensive set of exercises are presented to guide the reader through each technique. Explores both supervised and unsupervised techniques as well as advanced techniques such as data scraping and text management. Case studies are featured throughout along with examples for each technique presented. R code and solutions to exercises featured in the book are provided on a supporting website.}, language = {en} } @article{MunzertJankinal, author = {Munzert, Simon and Jankin, Slava and al., et}, title = {The 2019 report of The Lancet Countdown on health and climate change: ensuring that the health of a child born today is not defined by a changing climate}, series = {The Lancet}, volume = {394}, journal = {The Lancet}, number = {10211}, doi = {10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32596-6}, pages = {1836 -- 1878}, abstract = {The Lancet Countdown is an international, multidisciplinary collaboration, dedicated to monitoring the evolving health profile of climate change, and providing an independent assessment of the delivery of commitments made by governments worldwide under the Paris Agreement.}, language = {en} } @article{StoetzerNeunhoefferGschwendetal., author = {St{\"o}tzer, Lukas F. and Neunhoeffer, Marcel and Gschwend, Thomas and Munzert, Simon and Sternberg, Sebastian}, title = {Forecasting Elections in Multiparty Systems: A Bayesian Approach Combining Polls and Fundamentals}, series = {Political Analysis}, volume = {27}, journal = {Political Analysis}, number = {2}, doi = {10.1017/pan.2018.49}, pages = {255 -- 262}, abstract = {We offer a dynamic Bayesian forecasting model for multiparty elections. It combines data from published pre-election public opinion polls with information from fundamentals-based forecasting models. The model takes care of the multiparty nature of the setting and allows making statements about the probability of other quantities of interest, such as the probability of a plurality of votes for a party or the majority for certain coalitions in parliament. We present results from two ex ante forecasts of elections that took place in 2017 and are able to show that the model outperforms fundamentals-based forecasting models in terms of accuracy and the calibration of uncertainty. Provided that historical and current polling data are available, the model can be applied to any multiparty setting.}, language = {en} } @article{SelbMunzert, author = {Selb, Peter and Munzert, Simon}, title = {Examining a Most Likely Case for Strong Campaign Effects: Hitler's Speeches and the Rise of the Nazi Party, 1927-1933}, series = {American Political Science Review}, volume = {112}, journal = {American Political Science Review}, number = {4}, doi = {10.1017/S0003055418000424}, pages = {1050 -- 1066}, abstract = {Hitler's rise to power amidst an unprecedented propaganda campaign initiated scholarly interest in campaign effects. To the surprise of many, empirical studies often found minimal effects. The predominant focus of early work was on U.S. elections, though. Nazi propaganda as the archetypal and, in many ways, most likely case for strong effects has rarely been studied. We collect extensive data about Hitler's speeches and gauge their impact on voter support at five national elections preceding the dictatorship. We use a semi-parametric difference-in-differences approach to estimate effects in the face of potential confounding due to the deliberate scheduling of events. Our findings suggest that Hitler's speeches, while rationally targeted, had a negligible impact on the Nazis' electoral fortunes. Only the 1932 presidential runoff, an election preceded by an extraordinarily short, intense, and one-sided campaign, yielded positive effects. This study questions the importance of charismatic leaders for the success of populist movements.}, language = {en} } @article{GoebelMunzert, author = {G{\"o}bel, Sascha and Munzert, Simon}, title = {Political Advertising on the Wikipedia Marketplace of Information}, series = {Social Science Computer Review}, volume = {36}, journal = {Social Science Computer Review}, number = {2}, doi = {10.1177/0894439317703579}, pages = {157 -- 175}, abstract = {We point to a popular yet underresearched platform of political information, the online encyclopedia Wikipedia. Considering the supply side of the marketplace, we argue that personal biographies on the platform are an attractive medium for politicians to enhance their appearance. We trace changes to biographies coming from the parliament using data that cover the entire edit histories for biographies on all German members of parliament for the three last legislative periods. Our findings show editing of personal biographies to be a persistent phenomenon. Moreover, type, timing, and driving factors of editing behavior highlight the importance politicians' attribute to Wikipedia for pursuing reelection. Our results speak to the domains of political professionalization, voting behavior, and the general measurement of communicative patterns.}, language = {en} } @article{MunzertStoetzerGschwendetal., author = {Munzert, Simon and St{\"o}tzer, Lukas F. and Gschwend, Thomas and Neunhoeffer, Marcel and Sternberg, Sebastian}, title = {Zweitstimme.org. Ein strukturell-dynamisches Vorhersagemodell f{\"u}r Bundestagswahlen.}, series = {Politische Vierteljahresschrift}, volume = {58}, journal = {Politische Vierteljahresschrift}, number = {3}, issn = {0032-3470 (print); 1862-2860 (online)}, doi = {10.5771/0032-3470-2017-3-418}, pages = {418 -- 441}, abstract = {We present results of an ex-ante forecast of party-specific vote shares at the German Federal Election 2017. To that end, we combine data from published trial heat polls with structural information. The model takes care of the multi-party nature of the setting and allows making statements about the probability of certain events, such as the plurality of votes for a party or the majority for coalition options in parliament. The forecasts of our model are continuously being updated on the platform zweitstimme.org. The value of our approach goes beyond the realms of academia: We equip journalists, political pundits, and ordinary citizens with information that can help make sense of the parties' latent support and ultimately make voting decisions better informed.}, language = {de} } @article{Munzert, author = {Munzert, Simon}, title = {Forecasting elections at the constituency level: A correction-combination procedure}, series = {International Journal of Forecasting}, volume = {33}, journal = {International Journal of Forecasting}, number = {2}, doi = {10.1016/j.ijforecast.2016.12.001}, pages = {467 -- 481}, abstract = {Scholarly efforts to forecast parliamentary elections have targeted the national level predominantly, disregarding the outcomes of constituency races. In doing so, they have frequently failed to account for systematic bias in the seats-votes curve, and been unable to provide candidates and campaign strategists with constituency-level information. On the other hand, existing accounts of constituency-level election forecasting suffer from data sparsity, leading to a lack of precision. This paper proposes a correction-combination procedure that allows for the correction of individual constituency-level forecast models for election-invariant bias, then combines these models based on their past performances. I demonstrate the use of this procedure through out-of-sample forecasts of 299 district races at the 2013 German federal election.}, language = {en} } @article{MunzertSelb, author = {Munzert, Simon and Selb, Peter}, title = {Measuring Political Knowledge in Web-Based Surveys: An Experimental Validation of Visual Versus Verbal Instruments}, series = {Social Science Computer Review}, volume = {25}, journal = {Social Science Computer Review}, number = {2}, doi = {10.1177/0894439315616325}, pages = {167 -- 183}, abstract = {Does the opportunity to deliver visual instead of verbal stimuli of political knowledge to respondents in web-based surveys make a difference in terms of data quality? For instance, does the presentation of visual knowledge items reduce cheating, that is, looking up the answer via the Web? And do visual and verbal stimuli capture the same underlying construct? To test whether the use of visuals to measure political knowledge effectively makes a difference, we administer a question form experiment in an online survey of the German Longitudinal Election Study. Respondents are randomly assigned to one of two question formats—visual or verbal—and are asked to solve a set of eight questions on political leaders and their offices. The instruments are validated based on nonparametric item response theory and analyses of response latency. While there is no clear evidence for cheating behavior under either of the conditions, both instruments form strong knowledge scales. Results from a regression analysis indicate that the scales provide measures of closely related but not identical concepts.}, language = {en} } @article{SelbMunzert, author = {Selb, Peter and Munzert, Simon}, title = {Forecasting the 2013 German Bundestag Election Using Many Polls and Historical Election Results}, series = {German Politics}, volume = {25}, journal = {German Politics}, number = {1}, doi = {10.1080/09644008.2015.1121454}, pages = {73 -- 83}, abstract = {This article reports on an attempt to forecast the outcome of the 2013 election to the German Bundestag. In contrast to the predominant academic approach to forecast incumbent vote shares from measures of government popularity, economic conditions and other fundamental variables, we entirely relied on data from published trial heat polls. Opposite to common practice in the news media, we did not take isolated polls as election forecasts in their own right. Instead, we used historical data to assess empirically the relationship between polls and election outcomes, and combined extrapolations from current polls in a Bayesian manner. The forecast was published one month ahead of the election. The retrospective evaluation of our method was added after the election. While our method is parsimonious and provides a large lead time, the performance at the 2013 election was underwhelming. We offer additional suggestions how the approach can be improved in future scenarios.}, language = {en} } @article{HerrmannMunzertSelb, author = {Herrmann, Michael and Munzert, Simon and Selb, Peter}, title = {Determining the effect of strategic voting on election results}, series = {Journal of the Royal Statistical Society (Series A)}, volume = {179}, journal = {Journal of the Royal Statistical Society (Series A)}, number = {2}, doi = {10.1111/rssa.12130}, pages = {583 -- 605}, abstract = {Speculations about whether strategic voting made a difference to the outcome of an election regularly whip up the passions of pundits, party strategists, electoral reformers and scholars alike. Yet, research on strategic voting's political effect has been hampered by the scarcity of data on district level party preferences. We propose the use of Bayesian small area estimation to predict district level preferences from just a handful of survey responses per district and comparing these predictions against election results to estimate how many voters switched sides in each district. We apply the approach to estimate how many seats changed hands as a result of strategic voting at the 1997 and 2001 UK general elections. Despite similar rates of strategic voting in both elections, the number of seats that were affected was markedly greater in 1997. Interestingly, the Liberal Democrats turn out to win the most seats because of strategic voting. We also estimate how many votes went in the 'wrong' direction—away from otherwise viable candidates. We validate our results by using journalistic sources and compare them with previous published estimates.}, language = {en} } @article{BernauerMunzert, author = {Bernauer, Julian and Munzert, Simon}, title = {Loyal to the Game? Strategic Policy Representation in Mixed Electoral Systems}, series = {Representation. Journal of Representative Democracy}, volume = {50}, journal = {Representation. Journal of Representative Democracy}, number = {1}, doi = {10.1080/00344893.2014.902221}, pages = {83 -- 97}, abstract = {In Germany's compensatory mixed electoral system, alternative electoral routes lead into parliament. We study the relationship between candidates' electoral situations across both tiers and policy representation, fully accounting for candidate, party and district preferences in a multi-actor constellation and the exact electoral incentives for candidates to represent either the party or the district. The results (2009 Bundestag election data) yield evidence of an interactive effect of closeness of the district race and list safety on candidates' positioning between their party and constituency.}, language = {en} } @article{MunzertBauer, author = {Munzert, Simon and Bauer, Paul}, title = {Political Depolarization in German Public Opinion, 1980-2010}, series = {Political Science Research and Methods}, volume = {1}, journal = {Political Science Research and Methods}, number = {1}, doi = {10.1017/psrm.2013.7}, pages = {67 -- 89}, abstract = {Little is known about political polarization in German public opinion. This article offers an issue-based perspective and explores trends of opinion polarization in Germany. Public opinion polarization is conceptualized and measured as alignment of attitudes. Data from the German General Social Survey (1980 to 2010) comprise attitudes towards manifold issues, which are classified into several dimensions. This study estimates multilevel models that reveal general and issue- as well as dimension-specific levels and trends in attitude alignment for both the whole German population and sub-groups. It finds that public opinion polarization has decreased over the last three decades in Germany. In particular, highly educated and more politically interested people have become less polarized over time. However, polarization seems to have increased in attitudes regarding gender issues. These findings provide interesting contrasts to existing research on the American public.}, language = {en} } @article{SelbHerrmannMunzertetal., author = {Selb, Peter and Herrmann, Michael and Munzert, Simon and Sch{\"u}bel, Thomas and Shikano, Susumu}, title = {Forecasting runoff elections using candidate evaluations from first round exit polls}, series = {International Journal of Forecasting}, volume = {29}, journal = {International Journal of Forecasting}, number = {4}, doi = {10.1016/j.ijforecast.2013.02.001}, pages = {541 -- 547}, abstract = {We draw attention to a simple yet underappreciated way of forecasting the outcomes of elections involving two rounds of voting: surveying the voters' candidate evaluations in first round exit polls, poststratifying the sample proportions of reported votes to official first round election returns, and redistributing the votes for eliminated competitors according to their supporters' lower-order preferences among the viable alternatives in round two. We argue that the approach is likely to outperform standard pre-election surveys, due to its better coverage and reduced measurement error, and the possibility of correcting for sample selection. We set out the practical details of the method and demonstrate its usefulness by employing a recent German mayoral election as an empirical case. Thirteen candidates were competing in the first round, while there were six candidates in the decisive second round. The runoff result was forecast two weeks in advance with an average absolute error of less than one percentage point.}, language = {en} } @article{SelbMunzert, author = {Selb, Peter and Munzert, Simon}, title = {Voter overrepresentation, vote misreporting, and turnout bias in postelection surveys}, series = {Electoral Studies}, volume = {32}, journal = {Electoral Studies}, number = {1}, doi = {10.1016/j.electstud.2012.11.004}, pages = {186 -- 196}, abstract = {Figures from postelection surveys often grossly overestimate election turnout. Two distinct phenomena are responsible for this gap: overrepresentation of actual voters and vote misreporting by actual nonvoters among survey respondents. Previous accounts of turnout bias are inconclusive in that they either focus on a single component, or fail to separate between the two. In this paper, we formally decompose turnout bias in election surveys into its constituent parts, assess their empirical prevalence and heterogeneity using an extensive collection of 49 vote validation studies from six countries, and employ Bayesian meta regression techniques to account for cross-study differences. Our results indicate that both election and survey characteristics such as actual voter turnout and survey response rates differentially affect the components of turnout bias. We conclude with a discussion of the threats and potentials of our findings for survey-based comparative electoral research.}, language = {en} } @article{SelbMunzert, author = {Selb, Peter and Munzert, Simon}, title = {Estimating Constituency Preferences from Sparse Survey Data Using Auxiliary Geographic Information}, series = {Political Analysis}, volume = {19}, journal = {Political Analysis}, number = {4}, doi = {10.1093/pan/mpr034}, pages = {455 -- 470}, abstract = {Measures of constituency preferences are of vital importance for the study of political representation and other research areas. Yet, such measures are often difficult to obtain. Previous survey-based estimates frequently lack precision and coverage due to small samples, rely on questionable assumptions or require detailed auxiliary information about the constituencies' population characteristics. We propose an alternative Bayesian hierarchical approach that exploits minimal geographic information readily available from digitalized constituency maps. If at hand, social background data are easily integrated. To validate the method, we use national polls and district-level results from the 2009 German Bundestag election, an empirical case for which detailed structural information is missing.}, language = {en} } @article{Munzert, author = {Munzert, Simon}, title = {Big Data in der Forschung! Big Data in der Lehre? Ein Vorschlag zur Erweiterung der bestehenden Methodenausbildung}, series = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Politikwissenschaft}, volume = {24}, journal = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Politikwissenschaft}, number = {1-2}, issn = {1430-6387}, doi = {10.5771/1430-6387-2014-1-2-205}, pages = {207 -- 222}, language = {de} } @incollection{MunzertNyhuis, author = {Munzert, Simon and Nyhuis, Dominic}, title = {Die Nutzung von Webdaten in den Sozialwissenschaften}, series = {Handbuch Methoden der Politikwissenschaft}, booktitle = {Handbuch Methoden der Politikwissenschaft}, editor = {Wagemann, Claudius and Goerres, Achim and Siewert, Markus}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Heidelberg}, isbn = {978-3-658-16937-4}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-658-16937-4_22-1}, publisher = {Hertie School}, abstract = {Das Kapitel bietet einen {\"U}berblick der Webdatensammlung f{\"u}r die sozialwissenschaftliche Forschung. Zu diesem Zweck wird nach einem praktischen Beispiel eine {\"U}bersicht der grundlegenden Webtechnologien geboten, um in einem zweiten Schritt einen vertiefenden Blick auf das Web Scraping einerseits und Programmierschnittstellen andererseits zu werfen. Die praktische Umsetzung der Webdatensammlung wird mit Code-Beispielen in der Programmiersprache R illustriert. Nach der praktischen Einf{\"u}hrung werden Potenziale und Herausforderungen der webbasierten Sozialwissenschaft am Beispiel ausgew{\"a}hlter Anwendungen aus der aktuellen Forschungsliteratur diskutiert. Abschließend werden verschiedene technische und konzeptionelle Problemstellungen der Webdatensammlung dargelegt und einige weiterf{\"u}hrende Literaturhinweise f{\"u}r die vertiefte Auseinandersetzung mit den Themen des Kapitels geboten.}, language = {de} } @incollection{Munzert, author = {Munzert, Simon}, title = {Auf dem Weg zu einer fundierten Softwareausbildung in der Politikwissenschaft}, series = {Computational Social Science. Die Analyse von Big Data}, booktitle = {Computational Social Science. Die Analyse von Big Data}, editor = {Bl{\"a}tte (et al.), Adreas}, publisher = {Nomos}, address = {Baden-Baden}, isbn = {ISBN print: 978-3-8487-4393-3, ISBN online: 978-3-8452-8655-6}, doi = {10.5771/9783845286556-379}, publisher = {Hertie School}, pages = {379 -- 402}, language = {de} } @incollection{ShikanoMunzertSchuebeletal., author = {Shikano, Susumu and Munzert, Simon and Sch{\"u}bel, Thomas and Herrmann, Michael and Selb, Peter}, title = {Eine empirische Sch{\"a}tzmethode f{\"u}r Valenz-Issues auf der Basis der Kandidatenbeurteilung am Beispiel der Konstanzer Oberb{\"u}rgermeisterwahl 2012}, series = {Jahrbuch f{\"u}r Handlungs- und Entscheidungstheorie}, booktitle = {Jahrbuch f{\"u}r Handlungs- und Entscheidungstheorie}, editor = {Linhart, Eric and Kittel, Bernhard and B{\"a}chtiger, Andr{\´e}}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Wiesbaden}, isbn = {978-3-658-05007-8}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-658-05008-5_4}, publisher = {Hertie School}, pages = {113 -- 131}, abstract = {Bei der Entwicklung der r{\"a}umlichen Modelle des Parteienwettbewerbs spielt die Valenz eine wichtige Rolle. Trotz der theoretischen Relevanz bleibt die Mess- und Sch{\"a}tzmethode der Valenz unterentwickelt. Angesichts dieser Forschungsl{\"u}cke schl{\"a}gt dieser Beitrag ein statistisches Modell vor, das die gleichzeitige Sch{\"a}tzung der Kandidatenpositionen und der Valenz erm{\"o}glicht. Ein wichtiger Vorzug dieses Modells liegt darin, dass man nur die Kandidatenbeurteilungen per Skalometer ben{\"o}tigt, der in den meisten Umfragedaten verf{\"u}gbar ist. Dieses Modell wird auf Daten angewendet, die in Rahmen der Konstanzer Oberb{\"u}rgermeisterwahl 2012 erhoben wurden.}, language = {de} } @misc{Munzert, author = {Munzert, Simon}, title = {XML and Web Technologies for Data Sciences with R}, series = {Journal of Statistical Software}, volume = {81}, journal = {Journal of Statistical Software}, doi = {10.18637/jss.v061.b01}, language = {de} } @techreport{MunzertPapoutsiNowak, type = {Working Paper}, author = {Munzert, Simon and Papoutsi, Myrto and Nowak, Holger}, title = {Ein Jahr digitale Kontaktpersonennachverfolgung mit der Corona-Warn-App}, doi = {10.48462/opus4-3999}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-39994}, pages = {16}, abstract = {Nachdem es zwischenzeitlich ruhig um die Corona-Warn-App geworden war, nahm die Diskussion um digitale Kontaktpersonennachverfolgung im Fr{\"u}hjahr 2021 wieder Fahrt auf. Die Corona-Warn-App wurde mit lange erwarteten Zusatzfeatures zur Eventregistrierung und Erfassung von Schnelltestergebnissen ausgestattet, w{\"a}hrend die Luca-App aufgrund von Sicherheitsl{\"u}cken und Datenschutzm{\"a}ngeln zunehmend in die Kritik geriet. In unserem Bericht dokumentieren wir, wie popul{\"a}r diese Apps mittlerweile in der deutschen Bev{\"o}lkerung sind. Nach wie vor gilt: F{\"u}r die Wirksamkeit dieser Technologien ist die breitfl{\"a}chige Nutzung in der Bev{\"o}lkerung entscheidend. In unserer Erhebung, einem Smartphone-basierten Nutzertracking, das zwischen dem 19. Mai und 01. Juni 2021 durchgef{\"u}hrt wurde, zeigt sich nach wie vor deutliche Unterschiede in der Nutzung der beiden bekanntesten Apps - Corona-Warn-App und Luca-App. Im Vergleich zur vorherigen Befragung (M{\"a}rz/April 2021) sind jedoch einige Verschiebungen beobachtbar: Die Luca-App ist bekannter geworden, gleichzeitig steigt die Sorge um den Datenschutz der App allenfalls leicht an. Bei vielen Befragten besteht nach wie vor große Unklarheit {\"u}ber die Unterschiede in Funktionsweise und Zweck dieser Apps.}, language = {de} } @article{MunzertBarberAGuessetal., author = {Munzert, Simon and Barber{\´A}, Pablo and Guess, Andrew M. and Yang, JungHwan}, title = {Do Online Voter Guides Empower Citizens? Evidence from a Field Experiment with Digital Trace Data}, series = {Public Opinion Quarterly}, volume = {84}, journal = {Public Opinion Quarterly}, number = {3}, doi = {10.1093/poq/nfaa037}, pages = {675 -- 698}, abstract = {Voting Advice Applications (VAAs), which provide citizens with information on the party that best represents their political preferences, are often cited as evidence of the empowering capabilities of digital tools. Aside from the informational benefits of these voter guides, observational studies have suggested a strong effect on political participation and vote choice. However, existing impact evaluations have been limited by a reliance on convenience samples, lack of random assignment, or both. This raises questions about self-selection and the precise mechanisms underlying how voters learn about politics. Here, we provide evidence from a field experiment with survey outcomes conducted with a sample of over 1,000 German citizens in the 2017 federal election campaign. Using linked panel survey and digital trace data combined with a randomized encouragement to complete a VAA, we assess respondents' compliance with treatment and observe how the use of this tool affects political behavior, attitudes, media consumption, political knowledge, and even social media activity. Our findings reveal that the overwhelming consensus in favor of positive effects on turnout and vote choice should be treated with caution, as we find no such effects. Rather, the actual virtue of VAAs in a complex online information environment lies in increasing knowledge about parties' positions on issues—exactly the kind of information these tools were designed to provide.}, language = {en} } @article{MunzertWattsAmann, author = {Munzert, Simon and Watts, Nick and Amann, Markus}, title = {The 2020 report of The Lancet Countdown on health and climate change: responding to converging crises}, series = {The Lancet}, volume = {397}, journal = {The Lancet}, number = {10269}, pages = {129 -- 170}, language = {en} } @article{GuessBarberaMunzertetal., author = {Guess, Andrew M. and Barber{\´a}, Pablo and Munzert, Simon and Yang, JungHwan}, title = {The consequences of online partisan media}, series = {Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences}, volume = {118}, journal = {Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences}, number = {14}, editor = {Bail, Christopher Andrew}, doi = {10.1073/pnas.2013464118}, abstract = {What role do ideologically extreme media play in the polarization of society? Here we report results from a randomized longitudinal field experiment embedded in a nationally representative online panel survey (N = 1,037) in which participants were incentivized to change their browser default settings and social media following patterns, boosting the likelihood of encountering news with either a left-leaning (HuffPost) or right-leaning (Fox News) slant during the 2018 US midterm election campaign. Data on ≈ 19 million web visits by respondents indicate that resulting changes in news consumption persisted for at least 8 wk. Greater exposure to partisan news can cause immediate but short-lived increases in website visits and knowledge of recent events. After adjusting for multiple comparisons, however, we find little evidence of a direct impact on opinions or affect. Still, results from later survey waves suggest that both treatments produce a lasting and meaningful decrease in trust in the mainstream media up to 1 y later. Consistent with the minimal-effects tradition, direct consequences of online partisan media are limited, although our findings raise questions about the possibility of subtle, cumulative dynamics. The combination of experimentation and computational social science techniques illustrates a powerful approach for studying the long-term consequences of exposure to partisan news.}, language = {en} } @techreport{GoebelMunzert, type = {Working Paper}, author = {G{\"o}bel, Sascha and Munzert, Simon}, title = {The Comparative Legislators Database}, series = {SocArXiv Papers}, journal = {SocArXiv Papers}, doi = {10.31235/osf.io/kapfq}, abstract = {Knowledge about political representatives' behavior is crucial for a deeper understanding of politics and policy-making processes. Yet resources on legislative elites are scattered, often specialized, limited in scope or not always accessible. This article introduces the Comparative Legislators Database (CLD), which joins micro-data collection efforts on open-collaboration platforms and other sources, and integrates with renowned political science datasets. The CLD includes political, sociodemographic, career, online presence, public attention, and visual information for over 45,000 contemporary and historical politicians from ten countries. The authors provide a straightforward and open-source interface to the database through an R package, offering targeted, fast and analysis-ready access in formats familiar to social scientists and standardized across time and space. The data is verified against human-coded datasets, and its use for investigating legislator prominence and turnover is illustrated. The CLD contributes to a central hub for versatile information about legislators and their behavior, supporting individual-level comparative research over long periods.}, language = {en} } @misc{MunzertJankinetal, author = {Munzert, Simon and Jankin, Slava and et al.,}, title = {The 2021 report of the Lancet Countdown on health and climate change: code red for a healthy future}, series = {The Lancet}, journal = {The Lancet}, edition = {10311}, doi = {10.1016/S0140-6736(21)01787-6}, pages = {1619 -- 1662}, abstract = {The Lancet Countdown is an international collaboration that independently monitors the health consequences of a changing climate. Publishing updated, new, and improved indicators each year, the Lancet Countdown represents the consensus of leading researchers from 43 academic institutions and UN agencies. The 44 indicators of this report expose an unabated rise in the health impacts of climate change and the current health consequences of the delayed and inconsistent response of countries around the globe—providing a clear imperative for accelerated action that puts the health of people and planet above all else. The 2021 report coincides with the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change 26th Conference of the Parties (COP26), at which countries are facing pressure to realise the ambition of the Paris Agreement to keep the global average temperature rise to 1·5°C and to mobilise the financial resources required for all countries to have an effective climate response. These negotiations unfold in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic—a global health crisis that has claimed millions of lives, affected livelihoods and communities around the globe, and exposed deep fissures and inequities in the world's capacity to cope with, and respond to, health emergencies. Yet, in its response to both crises, the world is faced with an unprecedented opportunity to ensure a healthy future for all.}, language = {en} } @article{GschwendMuellerMunzertetal., author = {Gschwend, Thomas and M{\"u}ller, Klara and Munzert, Simon and Neunhoeffer, Marcel and Stoetzer, Lukas}, title = {The Zweitstimme Model: A Dynamic Forecast of the 2021 German Federal Election}, series = {PS: Political Science \& Politics}, volume = {55}, journal = {PS: Political Science \& Politics}, number = {1}, doi = {10.1017/S1049096521000913}, pages = {85 -- 90}, language = {en} } @article{MunzertSelb, author = {Munzert, Simon and Selb, Peter}, title = {Can we directly survey adherence to non-pharmaceutical interventions? Evidence from a list experiment conducted in Germany during the early Corona pandemic.}, series = {Survey Research Methods}, volume = {14}, journal = {Survey Research Methods}, number = {2}, doi = {10.18148/srm/2020.v14i2.7759}, pages = {205 -- 209}, abstract = {Self-reports of adherence to non-pharmaceutical interventions in surveys may be subject to social desirability bias. Existing questioning techniques to reduce bias are rarely used to monitor adherence. We conducted a list experiment to elicit truthful answers to the question whether respondents met friends or acquaintances and thus disregarded the social distancing norm. Our empirical findings are mixed. Using the list experiment, we estimate the prevalence of non-compliant behavior at 28\%, whereas the estimate from a direct question is 22\%. However, a more permissively phrased direct question included later in the survey yields an estimate of 47\%. All three estimates vary consistently across social groups. Interestingly, only the list experiment reveals somewhat higher non-compliance rates among the highly educated compared to those with lower education, yet the variance of the list estimates is considerably higher. We conclude that the list experiment compared unfavorably to simpler direct measurements in our case.}, language = {en} } @article{NeunhoefferGschwendMunzertetal., author = {Neunhoeffer, Marcel and Gschwend, Thomas and Munzert, Simon and Stoetzer, Lukas F.}, title = {Ein Ansatz zur Vorhersage der Erststimmenanteile bei Bundestagswahlen}, series = {Politische Vierteljahresschrift}, volume = {61}, journal = {Politische Vierteljahresschrift}, doi = {10.1007/s11615-019-00216-3}, pages = {111 -- 130}, abstract = {Almost half of the total seats in the German Bundestag are awarded through first-past-the post elections at the electoral-district level. However, many election forecasting models do not consider this. In this paper we present an approach to predicting the candidate-vote shares at the district level for the German Federal Elections. To that end, we combine the national-level election prediction model from zweitstimme.org with two district-level prediction models, a linear regression and an artificial neural network, that both use the same candidate and district characteristics for their predictions. All data in our approach are publicly available prior to the respective election; thus, our model yields real forecasts. The model is therefore able to provide valuable information to running candidates and the interested public in future elections. Moreover, our prediction results are also relevant for substantive research: with the aid of the resulting odds of winning, better measures can be created to characterize the competitiveness of an electoral district and the expected closeness of electoral-district elections, which can influence political behaviour. Furthermore, the prediction allows empirical statements to be made about the expected size of the Bundestag as well as the composition of its personnel.}, language = {de} } @article{WattsJankinMunzertetal., author = {Watts, Nick and Jankin, Slava and Munzert, Simon and Amann, Markus and Arnell, Nigel and Ayeb-Karlsson, Sonja and Beagley, Jessica and Belesova, Kristine and Boykoff, Maxwell and Byass, Peter and Cai, Wenjia and Campbell-Lendrum, Diarmid and Capstick, Stuart and Chambers, Jonathan and Coleman, Samantha and Dalin, Carole and Daly, Meaghan and Dasandi, Niheer}, title = {The 2020 report of The Lancet Countdown on health and climate change: responding to converging crises}, series = {The Lancet}, volume = {397}, journal = {The Lancet}, number = {10269}, doi = {10.1016/S0140-6736(20)32290-X}, pages = {129 -- 170}, abstract = {The world has already warmed by more than 1.2C compared with preindustrial levels, resulting in profound, immediate, and rapidly worsening health effects, and moving dangerously close to the agreed limit of maintaining temperatures "well below 2C". These health impacts are seen on every continent, with the ongoing spread of dengue virus across South America, the cardiovascular and respiratory effects of record heatwaves and wildfires in Australia, western North America, and western Europe, and the undernutrition and mental health effects of floods and droughts in China, Bangladesh, Ethiopia, and South Africa. In the long term, climate change threatens the very foundations of human health and wellbeing, with the Global Risks Report registering climate change as one of the five most damaging or probable global risks every year for the past decade.}, language = {en} } @article{ErfortStoetzerGschwendetal., author = {Erfort, Cornelius and Stoetzer, Lukas F. and Gschwend, Thomas and Koch, Elias and Munzert, Simon and Rajski, Hannah}, title = {The Zweitstimme Forecast for the German Federal Election 2025: Coalition Majorities and Vacant Districts}, series = {PS: Political Science \& Politics}, journal = {PS: Political Science \& Politics}, publisher = {Cambridge University Press (CUP)}, issn = {1049-0965}, doi = {10.1017/S1049096525000150}, pages = {1 -- 12}, 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{MunzertRamirezRuizBarberaetal., author = {Munzert, Simon and Ramirez-Ruiz, Sebastian and Barber{\´a}, Pablo and Guess, Andrew M. and Yang, JungHwan}, title = {Who's cheating on your survey? A detection approach with digital trace data}, series = {Political Science Research and Methods}, journal = {Political Science Research and Methods}, doi = {10.1017/psrm.2022.42}, pages = {1 -- 9}, abstract = {In this note, we provide direct evidence of cheating in online assessments of political knowledge. We combine survey responses with web tracking data of a German and a US online panel to assess whether people turn to external sources for answers. We observe item-level prevalence rates of cheating that range from 0 to 12 percent depending on question type and difficulty, and find that 23 percent of respondents engage in cheating at least once across waves. In the US panel, which employed a commitment pledge, we observe cheating behavior among less than 1 percent of respondents. We find robust respondent- and item-level characteristics associated with cheating. However, item-level instances of cheating are rare events; as such, they are difficult to predict and correct for without tracking data. Even so, our analyses comparing naive and cheating-corrected measures of political knowledge provide evidence that cheating does not substantially distort inferences.}, language = {en} } @article{MunzertRamirezRuiz, author = {Munzert, Simon and Ramirez-Ruiz, Sebastian}, title = {Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Voting Advice Applications}, series = {Political Communication}, journal = {Political Communication}, doi = {10.1080/10584609.2020.1843572}, pages = {16}, abstract = {We review the influence of voting advice applications (VAAs) on three core outcomes: turnout, vote choice, and issue knowledge. In a meta-analysis of 55 effects reported in 22 studies, comprising 73,673 participants in 9 countries, we find strong evidence for positive effects of VAA usage on reported turnout (OR = 1.87; 95\% CI = [1.50, 2.33]) and vote choice (OR = 1.44; 95\% CI = [1.16, 1.78]) as well as modest evidence on knowledge increase (partial correlation = 0.09; 95\% CI = [-0.01, 0.18]). At the same time, we observe large heterogeneity in effect sizes, for which study design turns out to be a key driver. Effects are substantively weaker in causally more rigorous experimental studies. We highlight the need for more well-powered experimental research as well as studies focusing on the acquisition of knowledge in VAA usage.}, language = {en} } @techreport{MunzertPapoutsiNowak, type = {Working Paper}, author = {Munzert, Simon and Papoutsi, Myrto and Nowak, Holger}, title = {Nutzung von digitalen Tools zur Unterst{\"u}tzung von COVID-19-Kontaktverfolgung}, edition = {Studienbericht - 22. April 2021}, doi = {10.48462/opus4-3830}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-38304}, pages = {13}, abstract = {In der dritten Welle der Corona-Pandemie kann der Corona-Warn-App zur Unterst{\"u}tzung der COVID-19-Kontaktnachverfolgung eine wichtige Rolle zukommen, um {\"U}bertragungen der Krankheit einzud{\"a}mmen. Dar{\"u}ber hinaus wird zunehmend {\"u}ber den Einsatz von Check-in-Apps diskutiert, die die Registrierung von Besuchen bestimmter Orte mittels QR-Codes erm{\"o}glichen. F{\"u}r die Effektivit{\"a}t dieser Technologien ist jedoch die breitfl{\"a}chige Nutzung in der Bev{\"o}lkerung entscheidend. In unserer Erhebung zeigen sich deutliche Unterschiede in der Nutzung der beiden bekanntesten Apps - Corona-Warn-App und Luca-App. Gleichzeitig wird sichtbar, in welchen Teilen der Bev{\"o}lkerung die Nutzung noch ausgebaut werden k{\"o}nnte. Ein Großteil der Nicht-Nutzer zweifelt nach wie vor an der Effektivit{\"a}t der Apps, hat Datenschutzbedenken oder f{\"u}hlt sich {\"u}ber die L{\"o}sungen nicht gut genug informiert. Die Ergebnisse basieren auf einer Befragung und Smartphone-basiertem Nutzertracking, die zwischen dem 24. M{\"a}rz. und 6. April 2021 durchgef{\"u}hrt wurde.}, language = {de} } @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{HelblingMaxwellMunzertetal., author = {Helbling, Marc and Maxwell, Rahsaan and Munzert, Simon and Traunm{\"u}ller, Richard}, title = {The importance of citizenship for deserving COVID-19 treatment}, series = {Humanities and Social Sciences Communications}, volume = {9}, journal = {Humanities and Social Sciences Communications}, number = {302}, doi = {10.1057/s41599-022-01311-4}, abstract = {Immigrant non-citizens are often considered less deserving than citizens of welfare and other public services. The logic is that valuable and scarce public resources must be limited somehow, and the club of citizens is one way of drawing a boundary. In this paper, we examine how far that boundary extends, by analyzing the extent to which Germans prioritize citizens over non-citizens for access to life-saving healthcare. We implement a conjoint experiment to elicit preferences in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The data were collected between April 2020 and March 2021, in 23 waves of an online rolling crosssectional survey with roughly 17,000 respondents. Our main finding is that citizens are viewed as more deserving of healthcare than non-citizen immigrants, a relationship that is sizeable and robust. Our findings have implications for debates about social boundaries and how to allocate resources in Western Europe.}, language = {en} } @article{RomanelloDiNapoliDrummondetal., author = {Romanello, Marina and Di Napoli, Claudia and Drummond, Paul and Green, Carole and Kennard, Harry and Lampard, Pete and Scamman, Daniel and Arnell, Nigel and Ayeb-Karlsson, Sonja and Berrang Ford, Lea and Belesova, Kristine and Bowen, Kathryn and Cai, Wenjia and Callaghan, Max and Campbell-Lendrum, Diarmid and Chambers, Jonathan and Daalen, Kim R van and Dalin, Carole and Dasandi, Niheer and Dasgupta, Shouro and Davies, Michael and Dominguez-Salas, Paula and Dubrow, Robert and Ebi, Kristie L and Eckelman, Matthew and Ekins, Paul and Escobar, Luis E and Georgeson, Lucien and Graham, Hilary and Gunther, Samuel H and Hamilton, Ian and Hang, Yun and H{\"a}nninen, Risto and Hartinger, Stella and He, Kehan and Hess, Jeremy J and Hsu, Shih-Che and Jankin, Slava and Jamart, Louis and Jay, Ollie and Kelman, Ilan and Kiesewetter, Gregor and Kinney, Patrick and Kjellstrom, Tord and Kniveton, Dominic and Lee, Jason K W and Lemke, Bruno and Liu, Zhao and Lott, Melissa and Lotto Batista, Martin and Lowe, Rachel and MacGuire, Frances and Sewe, Maquins Odhiambo and Martinez-Urtaza, Jaime and Maslin, Mark and McAllister, Lucy and McGushin, Alice and McMichael, Celia and Mi, Zhifu and Milner, James and Minor, Kelton and Minx, Jan C and Mohajeri, Nahid and Moradi-Lakeh, Maziar and Morrissey, Karyn and Munzert, Simon and Murray, Kris A and Neville, Tara and Nilsson, Maria and Obradovich, Nick and O'Hare, Megan B and Oreszczyn, Tadj and Otto, Matthias and Owfi, Fereidoon and Pearman, Olivia and Rabbaniha, Mahnaz and Robinson, Elizabeth J Z and Rockl{\"o}v, Joacim and Salas, Renee N and Semenza, Jan C and Sherman, Jodi D and Shi, Liuhua and Shumake-Guillemot, Joy and Silbert, Grant and Sofiev, Mikhail and Springmann, Marco and Stowell, Jennifer and Tabatabaei, Meisam and Taylor, Jonathon and Tri{\~n}anes, Joaquin and Wagner, Fabian and Wilkinson, Paul and Winning, Matthew and Yglesias-Gonz{\´a}lez, Marisol and Zhang, Shihui and Gong, Peng and Montgomery, Hugh and Costello, Anthony}, title = {The 2022 report of the Lancet Countdown on health and climate change: health at the mercy of fossil fuels}, series = {The Lancet}, volume = {400}, journal = {The Lancet}, number = {10363}, doi = {10.1016/S0140-6736(22)01540-9}, pages = {1619 -- 1654}, 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} } @techreport{DariusStockmannBrysonetal., type = {Working Paper}, author = {Darius, Philipp and Stockmann, Daniela and Bryson, Joanna and Cingolani, Luciana and Griffin, Rachel and Hammerschmid, Gerhard and Kupi, Maximilian and Mones, Haytham and Munzert, Simon and Riordan, R{\´o}n{\´a}n and Stockreiter, Simona}, title = {Implementing Data Access of the Digital Services Act: Collaboration of European Digital Service Coordinators and Researchers in Building Strong Oversight over Social Media Platforms}, doi = {10.48462/opus4-4947}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-49479}, pages = {11}, abstract = {The EU Digital Service Acts signals a move away from self-regulation towards co-regulation of social media platforms within the European Union. To address online harms and rising platform power the DSA clarifies responsibilities of platforms and outlines a new technology regulatory framework to increase oversight. One key oversight instrument constitutes Article 40 of the DSA, which lays out data access for vetted researchers, who add value to regulators and the broader public as creators of knowledge, educators, advisors, innovators, and watchdogs. Currently, the EU Commission and national governments make important decisions regarding Digital Service Coordinators (DSCs) that play a key role in implementation. Based on expertise on European public administration and political science we lay out key challenges and success factors of DSCs that will play a role in promoting successful cooperation between DSCs and researchers. We provide three recommendations: First, we recommend to strengthen transfer of scientific knowledge into policy-making by processing publicly accessible publications within public administrative bodies. To this end, capacities of DSCs need to be increased. In addition, we also point towards the database of vetted researchers collected by the Board of DSCs as important resource in order to strengthen knowledge transfer. Second, the DSC network requires agile institutions with fast response time in order to enable researchers to play a constructive role in implementation. This also includes institutional procedures between DSCs and the Intermediary Body and Data Protection Agencies. To avoid delay in implementation agile institution-building needs to start now. Finally, institutional safeguards will help to avoid strategic choice of companies of the DSC of establishment. At the same time, the Irish DSC's capacity should be strengthened compared to other national DSCs since most large intermediary services providers have their European headquarters in Ireland.}, language = {en} } @article{RomanelloWalawenderHsuetal., author = {Romanello, Marina and Walawender, Maria and Hsu, Shih-Che and Moskeland, Annalyse and Palmeiro-Silva, Yasna and Scamman, Daniel and Ali, Zakari and Ameli, Nadia and Angelova, Denitsa and Ayeb-Karlsson, Sonja and Basart, Sara and Beagley, Jessica and Beggs, Paul J and Blanco-Villafuerte, Luciana and Cai, Wenjia and Callaghan, Max and Campbell-Lendrum, Diarmid and Chambers, Jonathan D and Chicmana-Zapata, Victoria and Chu, Lingzhi and Cross, Troy J and van Daalen, Kim R and Dalin, Carole and Dasandi, Niheer and Dasgupta, Shouro and Davies, Michael and Dubrow, Robert and Eckelman, Matthew J and Ford, James D and Freyberg, Chris and Gasparyan, Olga and Gordon-Strachan, Georgiana and Grubb, Michael and Gunther, Samuel H and Hamilton, Ian and Hang, Yun and H{\"a}nninen, Risto and Hartinger, Stella and He, Kehan and Heidecke, Julian and Hess, Jeremy J and Jamart, Louis and Jankin, Slava and Jatkar, Harshavardhan and Jay, Ollie and Kelman, Ilan and Kennard, Harry and Kiesewetter, Gregor and Kinney, Patrick and Kniveton, Dominic and Kouznetsov, Rostislav and Lampard, Pete and Lee, Jason K W and Lemke, Bruno and Li, Bo and Liu, Yang and Liu, Zhao and Llabr{\´e}s-Brustenga, Alba and Lott, Melissa and Lowe, Rachel and Martinez-Urtaza, Jaime and Maslin, Mark and McAllister, Lucy and McMichael, Celia and Mi, Zhifu and Milner, James and Minor, Kelton and Minx, Jan and Mohajeri, Nahid and Momen, Natalie C and Moradi-Lakeh, Maziar and Morrisey, Karyn and Munzert, Simon and Murray, Kris A and Obradovich, Nick and O'Hare, Megan B and Oliveira, Camile and Oreszczyn, Tadj and Otto, Matthias and Owfi, Fereidoon and Pearman, Olivia L and Pega, Frank and Perishing, Andrew J and Pinho-Gomes, Ana-Catarina and Ponmattam, Jamie and Rabbaniha, Mahnaz and Rickman, Jamie and Robinson, Elizabeth and Rockl{\"o}v, Joacim and Rojas-Rueda, David and Salas, Renee N and Semenza, Jan C and Sherman, Jodi D and Shumake-Guillemot, Joy and Singh, Pratik and Sj{\"o}din, Henrik and Slater, Jessica and Sofiev, Mikhail and Sorensen, Cecilia and Springmann, Marco and Stalhandske, Z{\´e}lie and Stowell, Jennifer D and Tabatabaei, Meisam and Taylor, Jonathon and Tong, Daniel and Tonne, Cathryn and Treskova, Marina and Trinanes, Joaquin A and Uppstu, Andreas and Wagner, Fabian and Warnecke, Laura and Whitcombe, Hannah and Xian, Peng and Zavaleta-Cortijo, Carol and Zhang, Chi and Zhang, Ran and Zhang, Shihui and Zhang, Ying and Zhu, Qiao and Gong, Peng and Montgomery, Hugh and Costello, Anthony}, title = {The 2024 report of the Lancet Countdown on health and climate change: facing record-breaking threats from delayed action}, series = {The Lancet}, volume = {404}, journal = {The Lancet}, number = {10465}, publisher = {Elsevier BV}, issn = {0140-6736}, doi = {10.1016/S0140-6736(24)01822-1}, pages = {1847 -- 1896}, language = {en} } @article{MunzertTraunmuellerBarberaetal., author = {Munzert, Simon and Traunm{\"u}ller, Richard and Barber{\´a}, Pablo and Guess, Andrew and Yang, JungHwan}, title = {Citizen preferences for online hate speech regulation}, series = {PNAS Nexus}, volume = {4}, journal = {PNAS Nexus}, number = {2}, editor = {Ognyanova, Katherine}, publisher = {Oxford University Press (OUP)}, issn = {2752-6542}, doi = {10.1093/pnasnexus/pgaf032}, abstract = {The shift of public discourse to online platforms has intensified the debate over content moderation by platforms and the regulation of online speech. Designing rules that are met with wide acceptance requires learning about public preferences. We present a visual vignette study using a sample (n=2,622) of German and US citizens that were exposed to 20,976 synthetic social media vignettes mimicking actual cases of hateful speech. We find people's evaluations to be primarily shaped by message type and severity, and less by contextual factors. While focused measures like deleting hateful content are popular, more extreme sanctions like job loss find little support even in cases of extreme hate. Further evidence suggests in-group favoritism among political partisans. Experimental evidence shows that exposure to hateful speech reduces tolerance of unpopular opinions.}, language = {en} } @techreport{MunzertRamirezRuizWatteleretal., type = {Working Paper}, author = {Munzert, Simon and Ramirez-Ruiz, Sebastian and Watteler, Oliver and Breuer, Johannes and Batzdorfer, Veronika and Eder, Christina and Wiltshire, Deborah A and Barber{\´a}, Pablo and Guess, Andrew Markus and Yang, JungHwan}, title = {Publishing Combined Web Tracking and Survey Data}, publisher = {Center for Open Science}, doi = {10.31219/osf.io/y4v8z}, abstract = {Combined survey and web tracking data have great potential for social-scientific research. They allow linking information on online behavior with data on reported offline behavior, opinions, and attitudes. At the same time, ethical, legal, and technical challenges make it difficult to disseminate linked web tracking data to the scientific community. This whitepaper aims to address these challenges by providing guidance for researchers and archivists, discussing legal, practical, and ethical aspects, disclosure risks, and establishing a framework for publishing web tracking data. Recommendations for best practices are also provided based on experiences from a research project funded by the German Consortium for the Social, Behavioural, Educational and Economic Sciences.}, language = {en} } @article{GoebelMunzert, author = {G{\"o}bel, Sascha and Munzert, Simon}, title = {The Comparative Legislators Database}, series = {British Journal of Political Science}, journal = {British Journal of Political Science}, issn = {0007-1234}, doi = {10.1017/S0007123420000897}, abstract = {Knowledge about political representatives' behavior is crucial for a deeper understanding of politics and policy-making processes. Yet resources on legislative elites are scattered, often specialized, limited in scope or not always accessible. This article introduces the Comparative Legislators Database (CLD), which joins micro-data collection efforts on open-collaboration platforms and other sources, and integrates with renowned political science datasets. The CLD includes political, sociodemographic, career, online presence, public attention, and visual information for over 45,000 contemporary and historical politicians from ten countries. The authors provide a straightforward and open-source interface to the database through an R package, offering targeted, fast and analysis-ready access in formats familiar to social scientists and standardized across time and space. The data is verified against human-coded datasets, and its use for investigating legislator prominence and turnover is illustrated. The CLD contributes to a central hub for versatile information about legislators and their behavior, supporting individual-level comparative research over long periods.}, language = {en} } @article{RomanelloNapoliGreenetal., author = {Romanello, Marina and Napoli, Claudia di and Green, Carole and Kennard, Harry and Lampard, Pete and Scamman, Daniel and Walawender, Maria and Ali, Zakari and Ameli, Nadia and Ayeb-Karlsson, Sonja and Beggs, Paul J and Belesova, Kristine and Berrang Ford, Lea and Bowen, Kathryn and Cai, Wenjia and Callaghan, Max and Campbell-Lendrum, Diarmid and Chambers, Jonathan and Cross, Troy J and van Daalen, Kim R and Dalin, Carole and Dasandi, Niheer and Dasgupta, Shouro and Davies, Michael and Dominguez-Salas, Paula and Dubrow, Robert and Ebi, Kristie L and Eckelman, Matthew and Ekins, Paul and Freyberg, Chris and Gasparyan, Olga and Gordon-Strachan, Georgiana and Graham, Hilary and Gunther, Samuel H and Hamilton, Ian and Hang, Yun and H{\"a}nninen, Risto and Hartinger, Stella and He, Kehan and Heidecke, Julian and Hess, Jeremy J and Hsu, Shih-Che and Jamart, Louis and Jankin, Slava and Jay, Ollie and Kelman, Ilan and Kiesewetter, Gregor and Kinney, Patrick and Kniveton, Dominic and Kouznetsov, Rostislav and Larosa, Francesca and Lee, Jason K W and Lemke, Bruno and Liu, Yang and Liu, Zhao and Lott, Melissa and Lotto Batista, Mart{\´i}n and Lowe, Rachel and Odhiambo Sewe, Maquins and Martinez-Urtaza, Jaime and Maslin, Mark and McAllister, Lucy and McMichael, Celia and Mi, Zhifu and Milner, James and Minor, Kelton and Minx, Jan C and Mohajeri, Nahid and Momen, Natalie C and Moradi-Lakeh, Maziar and Morrissey, Karyn and Munzert, Simon and Murray, Kris A and Neville, Tara and Nilsson, Maria and Obradovich, Nick and O'Hare, Megan B and Oliveira, Camile and Oreszczyn, Tadj and Otto, Matthias and Owfi, Fereidoon and Pearman, Olivia and Pega, Frank and Pershing, Andrew and Rabbaniha, Mahnaz and Rickman, Jamie and Robinson, Elizabeth J Z and Rockl{\"o}v, Joacim and Salas, Renee N and Semenza, Jan C and Sherman, Jodi D and Shumake-Guillemot, Joy and Silbert, Grant and Sofiev, Mikhail and Springmann, Marco and Stowell, Jennifer D and Tabatabaei, Meisam and Taylor, Jonathon and Thompson, Ross and Tonne, Cathryn and Treskova, Marina and Trinanes, Joaquin A and Wagner, Fabian and Warnecke, Laura and Whitcombe, Hannah and Winning, Matthew and Wyns, Arthur and Yglesias-Gonz{\´a}lez, Marisol and Zhang, Shihui and Zhang, Ying and Zhu, Qiao and Gong, Peng and Montgomery, Hugh and Costello, Anthony}, title = {The 2023 report of the Lancet Countdown on health and climate change: the imperative for a health-centred response in a world facing irreversible harms}, series = {The Lancet}, volume = {402}, journal = {The Lancet}, number = {10419}, doi = {10.1016/S0140-6736(23)01859-7}, pages = {2346 -- 2394}, language = {en} } @article{StoetzerErfortRajskietal., author = {Stoetzer, Lukas F. and Erfort, Cornelius and Rajski, Hannah and Gschwend, Thomas and Munzert, Simon and Koch, Elias}, title = {An election forecasting model for subnational elections}, series = {Electoral Studies}, volume = {95}, journal = {Electoral Studies}, publisher = {Elsevier BV}, doi = {10.1016/j.electstud.2025.102939}, abstract = {While election forecasts predominantly focus on national contests, many democratic elections take place at the subnational level. Subnational elections pose unique challenges for traditional fundamentals forecasting models due to less available polling data and idiosyncratic subnational politics. In this article, we present and evaluate the performance of Bayesian forecasting models for German state elections from 1990 to 2024. Our forecasts demonstrate high accuracy at lead times of two days, two weeks, and two months, and offer valuable ex-ante predictions for three state elections held in September 2024. These findings underscore the potential for applying election forecasting models effectively to subnational elections.}, language = {en} } @techreport{OswaldMunzert, type = {Working Paper}, author = {Oswald, Lisa and Munzert, Simon}, title = {Exposure to untrustworthy news media then and now: Declining news media quality over 7 years}, publisher = {OSF}, doi = {10.31235/osf.io/5ndjx_v1}, pages = {8}, abstract = {In a rapidly evolving digital media landscape, understanding how exposure to untrustworthy news changes over time is essential for evaluating its potential effects on public attitudes and behavior. However, there is limited evidence on how demand for untrustworthy news develops across longer time frames. Linking web data with surveys, we compare exposure to untrustworthy news sources across demographic and political groups and over a 7-year time frame for two samples of German adults (N = 1,212 in 2017 and N = 436 in 2024). Visits to untrustworthy news sources make up less than 1\% of media diets and are associated with low satisfaction with democracy and a preference for a far-right party. Propensity score matching reveals stability in untrustworthy news exposure, yet a notable decline in the average quality of news diets over 7 years. These results suggest that while untrustworthy news exposure remains limited and stable, a broader erosion in news quality may pose a growing challenge for informed democratic engagement.}, language = {en} } @techreport{HartmannOueslatiStauferetal., type = {Working Paper}, author = {Hartmann, David and Oueslati, Amin and Staufer, Dimitri and Pohlmann, Lena and Munzert, Simon and Heuer, Hendrik}, title = {Lost in Moderation: How Commercial Content Moderation APIs Over- and Under-Moderate Group-Targeted Hate Speech and Linguistic Variations}, publisher = {arXiv}, doi = {10.48550/arXiv.2503.01623}, pages = {27}, abstract = {Commercial content moderation APIs are marketed as scalable solutions to combat online hate speech. However, the reliance on these APIs risks both silencing legitimate speech, called over-moderation, and failing to protect online platforms from harmful speech, known as under-moderation. To assess such risks, this paper introduces a framework for auditing black-box NLP systems. Using the framework, we systematically evaluate five widely used commercial content moderation APIs. Analyzing five million queries based on four datasets, we find that APIs frequently rely on group identity terms, such as ``black'', to predict hate speech. While OpenAI's and Amazon's services perform slightly better, all providers under-moderate implicit hate speech, which uses codified messages, especially against LGBTQIA+ individuals. Simultaneously, they over-moderate counter-speech, reclaimed slurs and content related to Black, LGBTQIA+, Jewish, and Muslim people. We recommend that API providers offer better guidance on API implementation and threshold setting and more transparency on their APIs' limitations. Warning: This paper contains offensive and hateful terms and concepts. We have chosen to reproduce these terms for reasons of transparency.}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{HartmannOueslatiStauferetal., author = {Hartmann, David and Oueslati, Amin and Staufer, Dimitri and Pohlmann, Lena and Munzert, Simon and Heuer, Hendrik}, title = {Lost in Moderation: How Commercial Content Moderation APIs Over- and Under-Moderate Group-Targeted Hate Speech and Linguistic Variations}, series = {Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems}, booktitle = {Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems}, publisher = {ACM}, address = {New York, NY, USA}, doi = {10.1145/3706598.3713998}, pages = {1 -- 26}, abstract = {Commercial content moderation APIs are marketed as scalable solutions to combat online hate speech. However, the reliance on these APIs risks both silencing legitimate speech, called over-moderation, and failing to protect online platforms from harmful speech, known as under-moderation. To assess such risks, this paper introduces a framework for auditing black-box NLP systems. Using the framework, we systematically evaluate five widely used commercial content moderation APIs. Analyzing five million queries based on four datasets, we find that APIs frequently rely on group identity terms, such as "black", to predict hate speech. While OpenAI's and Amazon's services perform slightly better, all providers under-moderate implicit hate speech, which uses codified messages, especially against LGBTQIA+ individuals. Simultaneously, they over-moderate counter-speech, reclaimed slurs and content related to Black, LGBTQIA+, Jewish, and Muslim people. We recommend that API providers offer better guidance on API implementation and threshold setting and more transparency on their APIs' limitations. Warning: This paper contains offensive and hateful terms and concepts. We have chosen to reproduce these terms for reasons of transparency.}, language = {en} } @article{RomanelloWalawenderHsuetal., author = {Romanello, Marina and Walawender, Maria and Hsu, Shih-Che and Moskeland, Annalyse and Palmeiro-Silva, Yasna and Scamman, Daniel and Smallcombe, James W and Abdullah, Sabah and Ades, Melanie and Al-Maruf, Abdullah and Ameli, Nadia and Angelova, Denitsa and Ayeb-Karlsson, Sonja and Ballester, Joan and Basaga{\~n}a, Xavier and Bechara, Hannah and Beggs, Paul J and Cai, Wenjia and Campbell-Lendrum, Diarmid and Charnley, Gina E C and Courtenay, Orin and Cross, Troy J and Dalin, Carole and Dasandi, Niheer and Dasgupta, Shouro and Davies, Michael and Eckelman, Matthew and Freyberg, Chris and Garcia Corral, Paulina and Gasparyan, Olga and Giguere, Joseph and Gordon-Strachan, Georgiana and Gumy, Sophie and Gunther, Samuel H and Hamilton, Ian and Hang, Yun and H{\"a}nninen, Risto and Hartinger, Stella and He, Kehan and Heidecke, Julian and Hess, Jeremy J and Jankin, Slava and Jay, Ollie and Pantera, Dafni Kalatzi and Kelman, Ilan and Kennard, Harry and Kiesewetter, Gregor and Kinney, Patrick and Kniveton, Dominic and Koubi, Vally and Kouznetsov, Rostislav and Lampard, Pete and Lee, Jason K W and Lemke, Bruno and Li, Bo and Linke, Andrew and Liu, Yang and Liu, Zhao and Lowe, Rachel and Ma, Siqi and Mabhaudhi, Tafadzwanashe and Maia, Carla and Markandya, Anil and Martin, Greta and Martinez-Urtaza, Jaime and Maslin, Mark and McAllister, Lucy and McMichael, Celia and Mi, Zhifu and Milner, James and Minor, Kelton and Minx, Jan and Mohajeri, Nahid and Momen, Natalie C and Moradi-Lakeh, Maziar and Morrisey, Karyn and Munzert, Simon and Murray, Kris A and Obradovich, Nick and Orgen, Papa and Otto, Matthias and Owfi, Fereidoon and Pearman, Olivia L and Pega, Frank and Pershing, Andrew J and Pinho-Gomes, Ana-Catarina and Ponmattam, Jamie and Rabbaniha, Mahnaz and Repke, Tim and Roa, Jorge and Robinson, Elizabeth and Rockl{\"o}v, Joacim and Rojas-Rueda, David and Ruiz-Cabrejos, Jorge and Rusticucci, Matilde and Salas, Renee N and San Jos{\´e} Plana, Adri{\`a} and Semenza, Jan C and Sherman, Jodi D and Shumake-Guillemot, Joy and Singh, Pratik and Sj{\"o}din, Henrik and Smith, Matthew R and Sofiev, Mikhail and Sorensen, Cecilia and Springmann, Marco and Stowell, Jennifer D and Tabatabaei, Meisam and Tartarini, Federico and Taylor, Jonathon and Tonne, Cathryn and Treskova, Marina and Trinanes, Joaquin A and Uppstu, Andreas and Valdes-Ortega, Nicolas and Wagner, Fabian and Watts, Nick and Whitcombe, Hannah and Wood, Richard and Yang, Pu and Zhang, Ying and Zhang, Shaohui and Zhang, Chi and Zhang, Shihui and Zhu, Qiao and Gong, Peng and Montgomery, Hugh and Costello, Anthony}, title = {The 2025 report of the Lancet Countdown on health and climate change: climate change action offers a lifeline}, series = {The Lancet}, volume = {406}, journal = {The Lancet}, number = {10521}, publisher = {Elsevier BV}, doi = {10.1016/S0140-6736(25)01919-1}, pages = {2804 -- 2857}, language = {en} }