APPENDIX B
Statistical Models and Results
CHAPTER 2
TABLE B.1   CONFLICT ORIENTATION IS TIED TO OTHER PSYCHOLOGICAL TRAITS
  QUALTRICS PANEL, AUGUST 2016
Extraversion 0.27*
Agreeableness −0.07
Conscientiousness 0.09
Emotional stability 0.18*
Openness 0.25*
*p < 0.05
CHAPTER 3
TABLE B.2   THE INTERACTION BETWEEN CONFLICT ORIENTATION AND INCIVILITY INFLUENCES EMOTIONAL RESPONSES
  ANXIOUS DISGUSTED ANGRY AMUSED ENTERTAINED ENTHUSIASTIC
Conflict orientation 0.01 0.005 0.004 0.03* 0.03* 0.03**
  (0.012) (0.016) (0.14) (0.011) (0.012) (0.010)
Treatments
Master Chef civil 0.03 −0.11 −0.07 0.20** 0.28** −0.15**
  (0.062) (0.081) (0.073) (0.059) (0.061) (0.053)
Master Chef uncivil 0.21** 0.50** 0.33** 0.27** 0.32** −0.20**
  (0.062) (0.082) (0.074) (0.060) (0.062) (0.054)
Planned Parenthood uncivil 0.32** 1.04** 0.83** 0.22** −0.03 −0.24**
  (0.063) (0.082) (0.074) (0.060) 0.062) (0.054)
C.O. × Treatments
Master Chef civil −0.01 0.01 0.01 −0.003 −0.04* −0.01
  (0.016) (0.021) (0.019) (0.015) (0.016) (0.014)
Master Chef uncivil −0.05** −0.10** −0.05** 0.014 0.02 −0.004
  (0.017) (0.22) (0.020) (0.016) (0.016) (0.014)
Planned Parenthood uncivil −0.05** −0.02 0.004 0.04* 0.03 0.005
  (0.017) (0.022) (0.019) (0.016) (0.016) (0.014)
Seven-point party ID 0.02 0.01 0.02 −0.006 −0.01 0.02
  (0.011) (0.014) (0.013) (0.010) (0.010) (0.009)
Ideology 0.0004 0.03 0.02 0.01 −0.007 −0.005
  0.013) (0.017) (0.016) (0.013) (0.013) (0.011)
Female 0.08* −0.03 0.03 −0.10** −0.02 0.01
  (0.035) (0.046) (0.042) (0.034) (0.035) (0.030)
Education 0.03 0.02 −0.007 −0.06** −0.04* −0.04**
  (0.018) (0.024) (0.021) (0.017) (0.018) (0.015)
Race/Ethnicity
Black −0.22** −0.29** −0.31** 0.05 0.23** 0.09
  (0.064) (0.083) (0.075) (0.061) (0.063) (0.054)
Other 0.32** −0.07 −0.13 0.36** 0.41** 0.42**
  (0.089) (0.116) (0.105) (0.085) (0.087) (0.076)
Hispanic 0.08 −0.12 0.03 0.03 0.13* 0.04
  (0.058) (0.076) (0.069) (0.056) (0.057) (0.050)
Multiracial (2+) −0.05 −0.09 −0.13 −0.03 0.04 −0.03
  (0.092) (0.120) (0.108) (0.087) (0.090) (0.078)
Constant 1.07** 1.42** 1.32** 1.67** 1.64** 1.58**
  (0.12) (0.16) (0.14) (0.12) (0.12) (0.104)
R2 0.06 0.16 0.11 0.04 0.07 0.04
N 3,048 3,048 3,048 3,048 3,048 3,048
Source: GfK.
Note: Cell entries are OLS regression coefficients with standard errors in parentheses.
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01
CHAPTER 4
TABLE B.3   BIVARIATE REGRESSION OF CONFLICT ORIENTATION ON MEDIA CONSUMPTION: PROJECT IMPLICIT
  AVERAGE WEEKLY USE NEWSPAPER NETWORK TV CABLE TV RADIO INTERNET
Conflict orientation 0.03** 0.03* 0.01 0.01 0.04** 0.05**
  (0.009) (0.012) (0.013) (0.012) (0.013) (0.012)
Constant 3.18** 2.04** 3.26** 2.59** 3.02** 4.99**
  (0.069) (0.093) (0.106) (0.096) (0.102) (0.094)
R2 0.010 0.004 0.001 0.001 0.008 0.018
N 1094 1094 1093 1093 1094 1094
Note: Cell entries are OLS regression coefficients with standard errors in parentheses.
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01
TABLE B.4   BIVARIATE REGRESSION OF CONFLICT ORIENTATION ON MEDIA CONSUMPTION: MECHANICAL TURK STUDY 1
  NEWSPAPER NETWORK TV CABLE TV RADIO INTERNET SOCIAL MEDIA
Conflict Orientation 0.007 −0.04** 0.01 0.01 0.01 −0.02
  (0.009) (0.012) (0.010) (0.017) (0.008) (0.020)
Constant −1.24** −2.15** −1.59** −2.79** −0.69** −3.13**
  (0.091) (0.130) (0.100) (0.160) (0.080) (0.194)
χ2 0.49 0.004 0.33 0.53 0.23 0.42
N 886 886 886 886 886 886
Note: Cell entries are logistic regression coefficients with standard errors in parentheses.
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01
TABLE B.5   REGRESSION OF FREQUENCY OF MEDIA EXPOSURE ON THE INTERACTION BETWEEN CONFLICT ORIENTATION AND POLITICAL INTEREST
  AVERAGE WEEKLY USE NEWSPAPER NETWORK TV CABLE TV RADIO INTERNET
Conflict orientation −0.02 0.03 −0.01 −0.012 −0.052 −0.041
  (0.029) (0.044) (0.049) (0.26) (1.10) (1.00)
Interest
Not very 0.42 −0.17 0.17 0.214 0.451 1.452
  (0.333) (0.500) (0.559) (0.42) (0.84) (3.12)**
Somewhat 1.28* 0.55 1.18* 0.757 1.691 2.230
  (0.282) (0.421) (0.473) (1.78) (3.72)** (5.67)**
Very 2.18* 1.26* 2.03* 1.664 2.454 3.505
  (0.281) (0.42) (0.471) (3.92)** (5.41)** (8.94)**
Extremely 2.89 1.93* 2.62* 2.678 3.085 4.124
  (0.278) (0.42) (0.466) (6.37)** (6.87)** (10.63)**
CCS–Interest Interaction
Not very 0.003 −0.04 0.003 0.015 0.007 0.035
  (0.037) (0.056) (0.063) (0.26) (0.11) (0.68)
Somewhat 0.03 −0.04 0.02 −0.009 0.102 0.088
  (0.033) (0.049) (0.055) (0.19) (1.93) (1.92)
Very 0.0008 −0.02 −0.04 −0.016 0.028 0.052
  (0.033) (0.050) (0.056) (0.32) (0.52) (1.11)
Extremely −0.001 −0.06 −0.03 −0.024 0.072 0.035
  (0.033) (0.049) (0.055) (0.49) (1.35) (0.76)
Constant 1.34* 1.00* 1.60* 1.123 0.918 2.072
  (0.256) (0.384) (0.431) (2.89)** (2.21)* (5.78)**
R2 0.27 0.09 0.12 0.14 0.12 0.24
N 1087 1087 1086 1,086 1,087 1,087
Source: Project Implicit.
Note: Cell entries are OLS regression coefficients with standard errors in parentheses.
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01
TABLE B.6   EFFECTS OF CONFLICT ORIENTATION AND INCIVILITY ON INFORMATION SEARCH
  (1) (2) (3) (3)
  NUMBER OF ARTICLES TIME ON ARTICLES PROPORTION UNCIVIL PROPORTION POLITICAL
Conflict orientation −0.0675*** −4.486*** −0.0106** −0.00298
  (0.0187) (1.377) (0.00431) (0.00488)
Uncivil treatment 0.356*** 13.03 0.0820*** 0.0764**
  (0.133) (9.778) (0.0306) (0.0347)
Uncivil treatment × Conflict orientation 0.0754*** 3.810** 0.0157*** 0.0107*
  (0.0240) (1.772) (0.00554) (0.00628)
Prefer news −0.0735 2.088 0.0205 0.101***
  (0.114) (8.438) (0.0264) (0.0299)
Political efficacy 0.0186 0.436 0.00509 −0.00103
  (0.0234) (1.729) (0.00541) (0.00613)
Political interest 0.192*** 15.23*** 0.0411** 0.0829***
  (0.0738) (5.444) (0.0170) (0.0193)
Democrat −0.180 −19.39* −0.0700** −0.0319
  (0.149) (10.96) (0.0343) (0.0389)
Independent −0.230 −16.18 −0.0389 −0.00428
  (0.169) (12.48) (0.0390) (0.0442)
Strong party −0.129 −6.436 −0.0288 −0.0110
  (0.140) (10.31) (0.0323) (0.0366)
Female −0.152 −3.589 −0.0352 −0.0520*
  (0.118) (8.734) (0.0273) (0.0310)
Reported anger 0.00820 −2.707 −0.0109 0.00820
  (0.0733) (5.409) (0.0169) (0.0192)
Reported disgust 0.00207 1.513 0.0150 −0.00913
  (0.0684) (5.043) (0.0158) (0.0179)
Reported anxiety 0.0300 1.107 −0.00145 −0.00789
  (0.0620) (4.571) (0.0143) (0.0162)
Reported enthusiasm −0.114 −5.332 −0.0154 −0.0188
  (0.0744) (5.489) (0.0172) (0.0195)
Reported amusement 0.153** 7.743* 0.0290** −0.000535
  (0.0635) (4.686) (0.0147) (0.0166)
Constant 1.674*** 45.03** 0.111* 0.0469
  (0.247) (18.24) (0.0571) (0.0647)
Observations 299 299 299 299
R2 0.107 0.088 0.106 0.165
Source: Mechanical Turk Study 2.
Note: Cell entries are OLS regression coefficients with standard errors in parentheses.
* p < 0.1, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01
TABLE B.7   ANXIETY FAILS TO MEDIATE THE CONFLICT ORIENTATION–INCIVILITY INTERACTION
  (1) (2) (3) (4)
  ARTICLES READ TIME SPENT ON ARTICLES PROPORTION UNCIVIL PROPORTION POLITICAL
Conflict orientation 0.0209 0.249 0.00772** 0.0112**
  (0.0165) (1.196) (0.00379) (0.00450)
Uncivil treatment −0.273** −8.846 −0.0642** −0.0697**
  (0.127) (9.161) (0.0289) (0.0343)
Uncivil treatment × Conflict orientation −0.077*** −3.696** −0.015*** −0.0116*
  (0.0240) (1.738) (0.00549) (0.00652)
Anxiety 0.0246 −0.337 −0.00240 −0.00651
  (0.0556) (4.022) (0.0127) (0.0151)
Constant 2.139*** 74.53*** 0.229*** 0.300***
  (0.0906) (6.555) (0.0207) (0.0246)
Observations 304 304 301 301
R2 0.042 0.025 0.029 0.030
Source: Mechanical Turk Study 2.
Note: Cell entries are OLS regression coefficients with standard errors in parentheses.
* p < 0.1, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01
TABLE B.8   ANGER FAILS TO MEDIATE THE CONFLICT ORIENTATION–INCIVILITY INTERACTION
  (1) (2) (3) (4)
  ARTICLES READ TIME SPENT ON ARTICLES PROPORTION UNCIVIL PROPORTION POLITICAL
Conflict orientation 0.0206 0.292 0.00787** 0.0112**
  (0.0165) (1.195) (0.00379) (0.00450)
Uncivil treatment −0.263** −7.133 −0.0588** −0.0732**
  (0.129) (9.357) (0.0295) (0.0351)
Uncivil treatment × Conflict orientation −0.078*** −3.819** −0.015*** −0.0113*
  (0.0241) (1.742) (0.00550) (0.00654)
Anger 0.00024 −2.612 −0.00914 0.000958
  (0.0509) (3.679) (0.0116) (0.0138)
Constant 2.151*** 75.81*** 0.233*** 0.297***
  (0.0911) (6.586) (0.0209) (0.0248)
Observations 304 304 301 301
R2 0.041 0.026 0.031 0.030
Source: Mechanical Turk Study 2.
Note: Cell entries are OLS regression coefficients with standard errors in parentheses.
* p < 0.1, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01
TABLE B.9   DISGUST FAILS TO MEDIATE THE CONFLICT ORIENTATION–INCIVILITY INTERACTION
  (1) (2) (3) (4)
  ARTICLES READ TIME SPENT ON ARTICLES PROPORTION UNCIVIL PROPORTION POLITICAL
Conflict orientation 0.0203 0.251 0.00764** 0.0112**
  (0.0166) (1.197) (0.00379) (0.00451)
Uncivil treatment −0.274** −9.059 −0.0694** −0.0746**
  (0.131) (9.478) (0.0299) (0.0355)
Uncivil treatment × Conflict orientation −0.077*** −3.679** −0.0143** −0.0112*
  (0.0243) (1.758) (0.00555) (0.00659)
Anger 0.0134 0.0792 0.00497 0.00252
  (0.0498) (3.599) (0.0113) (0.0135)
Constant 2.144*** 74.33*** 0.226*** 0.296***
  (0.0904) (6.538) (0.0207) (0.0246)
Observations 304 304 301 301
R2 0.041 0.025 0.030 0.030
Source: Mechanical Turk Study 2.
Note: Cell entries are OLS regression coefficients with standard errors in parentheses.
* p < 0.1, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01
TABLE B.10   ENTHUSIASM FAILS TO MEDIATE THE CONFLICT ORIENTATION–INCIVILITY INTERACTION
  (1) (2) (3) (4)
  ARTICLES READ TIME SPENT ON ARTICLES PROPORTION UNCIVIL PROPORTION POLITICAL
Conflict orientation 0.0214 0.301 0.00787** 0.0114**
  (0.0165) (1.195) (0.00379) (0.00450)
Uncivil treatment −0.260** −8.865 −0.0650** −0.0722**
  (0.124) (8.983) (0.0283) (0.0337)
Uncivil treatment × Conflict orientation −0.0752** −3.540** −0.014*** −0.0109*
  (0.0241) (1.742) (0.00550) (0.00654)
Anger −0.0581 −3.602 −0.0106 −0.0113
  (0.0657) (4.752) (0.0150) (0.0178)
Constant 2.180*** 76.22*** 0.234*** 0.303***
  (0.0929) (6.723) (0.0213) (0.0253)
Observations 304 304 301 301
R2 0.043 0.026 0.031 0.031
Source: Mechanical Turk Study 2.
Note: Cell entries are OLS regression coefficients with standard errors in parentheses.
* p < 0.1, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01
TABLE B.11   AMUSEMENT FAILS TO MEDIATE THE CONFLICT ORIENTATION–INCIVILITY INTERACTION
  (1) (2) (3) (4)
  ARTICLES READ TIME SPENT ON ARTICLES PROPORTION UNCIVIL PROPORTION POLITICAL
Conflict orientation 0.0190 0.160 0.00729* 0.0116**
  (0.0166) (1.198) (0.00380) (0.00452)
Uncivil treatment −0.288** −10.43 −0.0718** −0.0673*
  (0.126) (9.136) (0.0288) (0.0342)
Uncivil treatment × Conflict orientation −0.080*** −3.845** −0.015*** −0.0108*
  (0.0241) (1.741) (0.00549) (0.00653)
Amusement 0.0608 3.455 0.0158 −0.0125
  (0.0562) (4.065) (0.0128) (0.0153)
Constant 2.113*** 72.25*** 0.219*** 0.305***
  (0.0932) (6.744) (0.0213) (0.0253)
Observations 304 304 301 301
R2 0.045 0.027 0.034 0.032
Source: Mechanical Turk Study 2.
Note: Cell entries are OLS regression coefficients with standard errors in parentheses.
* p < 0.1, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01
TABLE B.12   THE IMPACT OF CONFLICT ORIENTATION AND INCIVILITY ON GENERAL MOOD
  (1) (2)
  POSITIVE MOOD NEGATIVE MOOD
Conflict orientation 0.0144* 0.00709
  (0.00789) (0.00697)
Uncivil treatment −0.00940 0.295***
  (0.0583) (0.0515)
Uncivil treatment × Conflict orientation 0.0202* −0.0138
  (0.0116) (0.0102)
Constant 0.601*** 0.553***
  (0.0396) (0.0350)
Observations 342 342
R2 0.061 0.130
Source: Mechanical Turk Study 2.
Note: Cell entries are OLS regression coefficients with standard errors in parentheses.
* p < 0.1, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01
TABLE B.13   THE MEDIATING EFFECT OF POSITIVE MOOD ON THE CONFLICT ORIENTATION–INCIVILITY INTERACTION
image
Source: Mechanical Turk Study 2.
Note: Cell entries are OLS regression coefficients with standard errors in parentheses.
* p < 0.1, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01
TABLE B.14   BIVARIATE REGRESSION OF POLITICAL PARTICIPATION ON CONFLICT ORIENTATION (PROJECT IMPLICIT)
image
Source: Project Implicit.
Note: Cell entries are logistic regression coefficients with standard errors in parentheses.
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01
TABLE B.15   BIVARIATE REGRESSION OF POLITICAL PARTICIPATION ON CONFLICT ORIENTATION (MECHANICAL TURK STUDY 1)
image
Source: Mechanical Turk Study 1.
Note: Cell entries are logistic regression coefficients with standard errors in parentheses.
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01
TABLE B.16   EFFECTS OF CONFLICT ORIENTATION ON PARTICIPATION, CONTROLLING FOR DEMOGRAPHICS (PROJECT IMPLICIT)
image
image
Source: Project Implicit.
Note: Cell entries are logistic regression coefficients with standard errors in parentheses.
* p < 0.1, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01
TABLE B.17   EFFECTS OF CONFLICT ORIENTATION ON PARTICIPATION, CONTROLLING FOR DEMOGRAPHICS (MECHANICAL TURK STUDY 1)
image
image
Source: Mechanical Turk Study 1.
Note: Cell entries are logistic regression coefficients with standard errors in parentheses.
* p < 0.1, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01
TABLE B.18   EFFECTS OF CONFLICT ORIENTATION AND INCIVILITY ON WILLINGNESS TO SHARE VIDEO CLIP
  INTEREST IN SHARING STORY
Uncivil clip 0.36*
  (0.176)
Conflict orientation 0.11*
  (0.038)
Incivility × Conflict orientation −0.002
  (0.051)
Party ID: Democrat 0.34
  (0.254)
Party ID: Independent 0.46
  (0.265)
Party strength 0.66*
  (0.212)
Ideology −0.02
  (0.059)
Female 0.09
  (0.160)
Age −0.007
  (0.0047)
Education: High school 0.18
  (0.288)
Education: Some college −0.30
  (0.299)
Education: Bachelor’s degree + −0.34
  (0.310)
Income −0.04*
  (0.018)
White −0.82*
  (0.188)
Hispanic −0.21
  (0.248)
Constant −1.73*
  (0.471)
Pseudo R2 0.06
N 3017
Source: GfK.
Note: Cell entries are logistic regression coefficients with standard errors in parentheses.
* p < 0.05
TABLE B.19   PARTICIPATORY EFFECTS OF THE INTERACTION BETWEEN CONFLICT ORIENTATION AND RACE (PROJECT IMPLICIT)
  (1) (2) (3) (4)
  COMMENT ON BLOGS ATTEND A PROTEST PERSUADE OTHERS CALL A REPRESENTATIVE
Conflict orientation 0.0407*** 0.0210 0.0234 0.0279*
  (0.0151) (0.0164) (0.0146) (0.0142)
Extraversion 0.0206 0.0426 0.0188 −0.0236
  (0.0253) (0.0279) (0.0244) (0.0239)
Agreeableness −0.0139 −0.0268 0.00611 −0.00605
  (0.0380) (0.0417) (0.0369) (0.0359)
Conscientiousness −0.102*** −0.0603* 0.0101 −0.0384
  (0.0296) (0.0324) (0.0290) (0.0282)
Emotional stability −0.0250 0.0493 0.0409 0.000475
  (0.0305) (0.0338) (0.0295) (0.0288)
Openness 0.0109 0.103** 0.0279 0.0551
  (0.0378) (0.0438) (0.0362) (0.0356)
Political interest 0.890*** 0.858*** 0.939*** 0.746***
  (0.0926) (0.104) (0.0879) (0.0843)
Party strength 0.0918 0.171 0.291 −0.215
  (0.203) (0.224) (0.188) (0.191)
Democrat −0.0302 0.380* 0.338* 0.412**
  (0.197) (0.221) (0.179) (0.181)
Age 0.00540 −0.0148** 0.000136 0.0178***
  (0.00578) (0.00667) (0.00571) (0.00555)
Hispanic 0.201 0.160 0.189 −0.365
  (0.289) (0.315) (0.274) (0.282)
Black −0.291 0.859** 0.235 −0.260
  (0.353) (0.377) (0.368) (0.335)
Female 0.0520 0.320* 0.145 0.647***
  (0.172) (0.192) (0.169) (0.170)
Black × Conflict orientation −0.0315 0.165*** 0.00544 0.0499
  (0.0482) (0.0583) (0.0478) (0.0461)
Constant −3.917*** −4.629*** −3.977*** −4.242***
  (0.397) (0.464) (0.376) (0.380)
Observations 998 998 998 998
Source: Project Implicit.
Note: Cell entries represent logistic regression coefficients with standard errors in parentheses.
* p < 0.1, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01
TABLE B.20   PARTICIPATORY EFFECTS OF THE INTERACTION BETWEEN CONFLICT ORIENTATION AND RACE (MECHANICAL TURK STUDY 1)
  (1) (2) (3) (4)
  COMMENT ON BLOGS ATTEND PROTEST PERSUADE OTHERS CALL A REPRESENTATIVE
Conflict orientation 0.0141 0.0452*** 0.0288** 0.0251*
  (0.0121) (0.0168) (0.0123) (0.0134)
Democrat −1.187** 0.113 −0.563 0.525
  (0.551) (0.794) (0.521) (0.643)
Strong partisan 0.583 0.527 0.600 −0.282
  (0.451) (0.676) (0.427) (0.534)
Ideology −0.335*** −0.0801 −0.125 0.00736
  (0.0966) (0.138) (0.0909) (0.107)
Political interest 0.727*** 0.579*** 0.767*** 0.661***
  (0.127) (0.183) (0.125) (0.142)
Education −0.0979 0.399** 0.125 0.124
  (0.120) (0.183) (0.117) (0.137)
Black 0.0415 0.316 0.905 −0.317
  (0.610) (0.751) (0.738) (0.743)
Black × Conflict orientation −0.0129 −0.0113 0.156* 0.0647
  (0.0583) (0.0813) (0.0819) (0.0846)
Income −0.0223 −0.108 0.0202 −0.0399
  (0.0593) (0.0869) (0.0577) (0.0668)
Female 0.0629 −0.192 1.132*** 0.591**
  (0.216) (0.318) (0.215) (0.242)
Age −0.00302 −0.0219 −0.0174** 0.0232**
  (0.00889) (0.0138) (0.00876) (0.00925)
Constant −1.528*** −3.699*** −1.939*** −3.753***
  (0.485) (0.780) (0.480) (0.587)
Observations 533 533 533 533
Source: Mechanical Turk Study 1.
Note: Cell entries are logistic regression coefficients with standard errors in parentheses.
* p < 0.1, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01
TABLE B.21   PARTICIPATORY EFFECTS OF THE INTERACTION BETWEEN CONFLICT ORIENTATION AND GENDER (PROJECT IMPLICIT)
  (1) (2) (3) (4)
  COMMENT ON BLOGS PROTEST PERSUADE OTHERS CALL WA REP
Conflict orientation 0.0538** 0.0441* 4.25e−05 0.0377*
  (0.0216) (0.0235) (0.0209) (0.0208)
Extraversion 0.0208 0.0444 0.0183 −0.0231
  (0.0253) (0.0278) (0.0245) (0.0239)
Agreeableness −0.0120 −0.0307 0.00500 −0.00751
  (0.0379) (0.0415) (0.0370) (0.0359)
Conscientiousness −0.102*** −0.0569* 0.00951 −0.0384
  (0.0296) (0.0320) (0.0291) (0.0282)
Emotional stability −0.0276 0.0451 0.0450 −0.000775
  (0.0306) (0.0337) (0.0297) (0.0288)
Openness 0.0135 0.0968** 0.0253 0.0548
  (0.0379) (0.0434) (0.0362) (0.0357)
Interest 0.891*** 0.847*** 0.940*** 0.746***
  (0.0925) (0.103) (0.0882) (0.0843)
Party strength 0.0992 0.145 0.287 −0.218
  (0.203) (0.222) (0.189) (0.191)
Democrat −0.0382 0.393* 0.344* 0.414**
  (0.197) (0.220) (0.179) (0.181)
Age 0.00551 −0.0136** −0.000149 0.0181***
  (0.00578) (0.00663) (0.00570) (0.00556)
Hispanic 0.197 0.142 0.194 −0.370
  (0.290) (0.316) (0.274) (0.283)
Black −0.143 0.206 0.187 −0.478*
  (0.282) (0.284) (0.267) (0.267)
Female −0.0422 0.286 0.306 0.611***
  (0.197) (0.210) (0.199) (0.194)
Female × Conflict orientation −0.0259 −0.0170 0.0394 −0.0103
  (0.0266) (0.0289) (0.0257) (0.0252)
Constant −3.904*** −4.542*** −4.025*** −4.216***
  (0.396) (0.460) (0.379) (0.380)
Observations 998 998 998 998
Source: Project Implicit.
Note: Cell entries are logistic regression coefficients with standard errors in parentheses.
* p < 0.1, ** p<0.05, *** p < 0.01
TABLE B.22   PARTICIPATORY EFFECTS OF THE INTERACTION BETWEEN CONFLICT ORIENTATION AND GENDER (MECHANICAL TURK STUDY 1)
  (1) (2) (3) (4)
  COMMENT ON BLOGS PROTEST PERSUADE OTHERS CALL REP
Conflict orientation 0.0310* 0.0598*** 0.0259 0.0528***
  (0.0161) (0.0218) (0.0158) (0.0188)
Democrat −1.181** 0.151 −0.611 0.556
  (0.552) (0.798) (0.520) (0.648)
Strong partisan 0.577 0.511 0.648 −0.292
  (0.451) (0.680) (0.426) (0.537)
Ideology −0.340*** −0.0810 −0.137 −1.20e−05
  (0.0965) (0.138) (0.0902) (0.107)
Political interest 0.734*** 0.579*** 0.752*** 0.667***
  (0.128) (0.183) (0.124) (0.142)
Education −0.0995 0.399** 0.126 0.131
  (0.120) (0.183) (0.117) (0.136)
Black 0.124 0.370 −0.309 −0.794
  (0.403) (0.544) (0.403) (0.536)
Income −0.0166 −0.103 0.0215 −0.0293
  (0.0596) (0.0876) (0.0576) (0.0670)
Female −0.107 −0.284 1.202*** 0.420
  (0.242) (0.337) (0.249) (0.262)
Age −0.00244 −0.0205 −0.0174** 0.0237**
  (0.00887) (0.0137) (0.00877) (0.00922)
Female × Conflict orientation −0.0382 −0.0355 0.0182 −0.0513**
  (0.0234) (0.0332) (0.0244) (0.0260)
Constant −1.546*** −3.778*** −1.926*** −3.847***
  (0.486) (0.783) (0.478) (0.592)
Observations 533 533 533 533
Source: Mechanical Turk Study 1.
Note: Cell entries are logistic regression coefficients with standard errors in parentheses.
* p < 0.1, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01