English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

Skinner and Klinkner (2004) argue that attitudes reflecting racial prejudice were present in the 2003 Louisiana governors race, and were even stronger in north Louisiana. Utilizing as did they aggregate data with an approach that better fits theory and available data, this study shows that they overstate the significance and importance of presumed racial prejudice in the election, especially statewide. Across the state, attitudes reflecting racial prejudice had no impact on the vote decision, and where they did in north Louisiana, the effects were small enough that they did not change the outcome of the contest. However, using individual-level data showed that partisan effects strongly controlled voting in this contest; in fact, non-Republicans displayed a chauvinistic tendency in their voting while a Republican partisanship negated this effect. Conflating various meanings to variables and inferior indicators explains the less-valid results and interpretations achieved by the use of aggregate data compared to the individual-level data.

Partisanship, Chauvinism, and Reverse Racial Dynamics in the 2003 Louisiana Gubernatorial Election