S.I. 14 Outcome favorability effect across the three experiments
Figure 1 in the manuscript:
| Treatment value | Estimate | Std. Error | t-statistic | p value | 
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Study 1 | -0.66 | 0.08 | -8.28 | 0.00 | 
| Study 2 | -0.12 | 0.06 | -1.97 | 0.05 | 
| Study 3 | -0.30 | 0.04 | -8.15 | 0.00 | 
| Treatment value | Estimate | Std. Error | t-statistic | p value | Issue | 
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfavorable outcome | -0.15 | 0.05 | -3.18 | 0 | Ban on begging | 
| Unfavorable outcome | -0.45 | 0.06 | -7.97 | 0 | Road toll increase of diesel cars | 
Hainmueller, Jens, Daniel J Hopkins, and Teppei Yamamoto. 2014. “Causal Inference in Conjoint Analysis: Understanding Multidimensional Choices via Stated Preference Experiments.” Political Analysis 22 (1): 1–30.
Huff, Connor, and Joshua D Kertzer. 2018. “How the Public Defines Terrorism.” American Journal of Political Science 62 (1): 55–71.
Leeper, Thomas J, Sara B Hobolt, and James Tilley. 2020. “Measuring Subgroup Preferences in Conjoint Experiments.” Political Analysis 28 (2): 207–21.