Stuart Turnbull-Dugarte
LightNews LightNews
banner
turnbulldugarte.com
Stuart Turnbull-Dugarte
@turnbulldugarte.com
5.5K followers 1.3K following 800 posts

Political scientist 🇿🇦🏳️‍🌈
Associate Editor POQ, EJPG, and R&P
he/him

Far-right, social identities, & electoral behaviour

Writing a book on LGBTQ voters for PUP 🏳️‍🌈🗳️

http://turnbulldugarte.com/

#ihadablackdog
https://youtu.be/XiCrniLQGYc?si=q-gQTNXfScmgtl4k .. more

Videos
Political science 71%
Psychology 8%
Posts Replies Media Videos
Pinned
turnbulldugarte.com
Stuart Turnbull-Dugarte @turnbulldugarte.com · Sep 5
Radical right accommodation really does not work.

New paper out with this exceptionally talented team
@katharinalawall.bsky.social @robjohns75.bsky.social @drjennings.bsky.social @sarahobolt.bsky.social @zachdickson.bsky.social @danjdevine.bsky.social & @jack-bailey.co.uk

doi.org/10.31235/osf...

Reposted by David M. Farrell, Simon Otjes, Justin H. Kirkland , and 6 more

nathaliegiger.bsky.social
Nathalie Giger @nathaliegiger.bsky.social · 5h
🔔Job Alert 🔔
Thrilled to share that @stefaniebailer.bsky.social and I have been awarded 1.5 million CHF in SNSF funding for our new project: “Electoral choice: Which role does legislators’ quality play?”
We’re recruiting 1 postdoc and 2 PhD candidates to join us in Basel and Geneva!

Reposted by Simon Hix, Dave O’Brien, Stuart J. Turnbull‐Dugarte , and 2 more

bjpols.bsky.social
British Journal of Political Science @bjpols.bsky.social · 23h
NEWS -

The Politics of Imperial Nostalgia - https://cup.org/4p1QbRA

"right-wing opposition to criticism of the imperial past is stronger than left-wing support"

- Christopher Claassen & @danjdevine.bsky.social

#OpenAccess
BJPolS abstract discussing the nostalgia for empire in post-imperial European contexts, examining public opinion and attitudes towards imperial history.

Reposted by Will Jennings, Ruth Dassonneville, Steffen Mau , and 4 more

indubioproreto.bsky.social
Reto Mitteregger @indubioproreto.bsky.social · 1d
New Publication with @lhaffert.bsky.social in @ejprjournal.bsky.social!

We study the role of generations in the urban-rural divide, which is increasingly shaping the politics of many democracies.

Studying Switzerland, we show: The urban-rural divide is stronger among younger generations. (1/10) 🧵👇

turnbulldugarte.com
Stuart Turnbull-Dugarte @turnbulldugarte.com · 2d
👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽

Reposted by Simon Hix, Lukas F. Stoetzer, Robert Huber , and 2 more

haasvioleta.bsky.social
Violeta Haas @haasvioleta.bsky.social · 2d
Happy that our paper with @bogatyrev.bsky.social, @tabouchadi.bsky.social, @heikekluever.bsky.social, and @lstoetze.bsky.social found a home at @thejop.bsky.social. You can read it here 👇

www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/...

Thanks to all the fantastic people giving feedback and supporting us

turnbulldugarte.com
Stuart Turnbull-Dugarte @turnbulldugarte.com · 2d
Congrats to you (and all involved) - great paper with a well-deserved home.

Reposted by Stuart J. Turnbull‐Dugarte

bogatyrev.bsky.social
Konstantin Bogatyrev @bogatyrev.bsky.social · 2d
Our paper just got accepted in the @thejop.bsky.social 🎉 and is now on the journal website: www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/... For me personally, it's a milestone: my first paper accepted after a peer review!

Reposted by Stuart J. Turnbull‐Dugarte, Tarik Abou‐Chadi

catherinedevries.bsky.social
Catherine E. de Vries @catherinedevries.bsky.social · 3d
Thank you for writing this @casmudde.bsky.social saves me to have to explain this every other week to journalists and politicians! This plus the great work by @tabouchadi.bsky.social et al & @turnbulldugarte.com et al should now hopefully settle this issue.

Reposted by Simon Hix, Ben H. Ansell, Jan Rath , and 10 more

tabouchadi.bsky.social
Tarik Abou-Chadi @tabouchadi.bsky.social · 3d
Cas Mudde spells out what has become largely the consensus among researchers: moving right on immigration will not weaken the far right nor strengthen social democracy. If your reaction is "but in Denmark" please at least familiarize yourself with Danish politics

www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...
The ‘Danish model’ is the darling of centre-left parties like Labour. The problem is, it doesn’t even work in Denmark | Cas Mudde
This week’s local elections are the latest reminder that when social democrats move rightwards, they’re making a mistake, says academic and author Cas Mudde
www.theguardian.com

Reposted by Tim Bale, Stefan Müller, Lucas Leemann , and 2 more

chanret.bsky.social
Chris Hanretty @chanret.bsky.social · 4d
NEW ARTICLE: @palesl.bsky.social, Vesa Koskimaa and I have an letter out in JOP, "Politicians talk less about the future as they age" doi.org/10.1086/739406 (1/10)
Legislators talk less about the future as they age | The Journal of Politics: Vol 0, No ja
doi.org

turnbulldugarte.com
Stuart Turnbull-Dugarte @turnbulldugarte.com · 4d
congrats Will and all! 🫶

turnbulldugarte.com
Stuart Turnbull-Dugarte @turnbulldugarte.com · 4d
Not every day is a good-news-in-inbox day. But today it is.

Our project "Where shall we live, darling?" led by Michal has been generously funded by the Swedish Research Council. For the next 3 years we'll be working on, among other things, the political consequences of LGBT spatial concentration
grahn.bsky.social Michal Grahn @grahn.bsky.social · 4d
So happy to have received a new, generous grant (500k EUR) from @vetenskapsradet.bsky.social to continue exploring the causes and consequences of voluntary segregation among lesbians, gays and bisexuals in Sweden. This time with a dream team of @rafaelahlskog.bsky.social & @turnbulldugarte.com
a cartoon of donald duck holding a stack of money
ALT: a cartoon of donald duck holding a stack of money
media.tenor.com

Reposted by Stuart J. Turnbull‐Dugarte

grahn.bsky.social
Michal Grahn @grahn.bsky.social · 4d
So happy to have received a new, generous grant (500k EUR) from @vetenskapsradet.bsky.social to continue exploring the causes and consequences of voluntary segregation among lesbians, gays and bisexuals in Sweden. This time with a dream team of @rafaelahlskog.bsky.social & @turnbulldugarte.com
a cartoon of donald duck holding a stack of money
ALT: a cartoon of donald duck holding a stack of money
media.tenor.com

Reposted by Max Grömping, Isabelle Guinaudeau, Stuart J. Turnbull‐Dugarte

williamlallen.bsky.social
Will Allen @williamlallen.bsky.social · 4d
Who shares which sources on social media, and why does this matter politically? Our open-access @polcommjournal.bsky.social article shows how far-right French Twitter/X users strategically post and cite sources to achieve their goals. doi.org/10.1080/1058... #polisky #commsky #migcitsky A 🧵:

Reposted by Will Jennings, Lucas Leemann, Robert Huber , and 4 more

mabreyer.bsky.social
Magda Breyer @mabreyer.bsky.social · 4d
New article out in @cpsjournal.bsky.social with Tabea Palmtag and @dpzollinger.bsky.social 📝
We use open-ended survey questions (in Germany) to assess how and among whom social status shifts are perceived. This tests cultural backlash narratives in voters' perceptions.

🔗 doi.org/10.1177/0010...
Abstract It is widely accepted in political science – and remarkably established in public discourse – that status anxieties fuel a far right backlash against progressive politics. This narrative suggests that right-wing conservatives perceive the status of women, racial, or sexual minorities as threatening. Using open-ended survey questions fielded in Germany, we show that women and minorities indeed figure in people’s perceptions of status hierarchies, but in very specific ways: First, overall, people still perceive status as largely socioeconomically determined. Second, sociocultural groups figure in perceptions of who is gaining/losing status, less so in perceptions of the top/bottom of society. Third, more than conservative voters, it is social progressives who mention women and minorities as “winners”. While on race/ethnicity, we find evidence for a backlash, on gender and sexuality we find more evidence for a progressive momentum. This matters for progressive politics today and for how we empirically study status concerns.

turnbulldugarte.com
Stuart Turnbull-Dugarte @turnbulldugarte.com · 5d
Have made it into the House politics lesson series and can now happily retire

www.politicshome.com/opinion/arti...

Reposted by Will Jennings, Tim Bale, Chris Hanretty , and 3 more

philipjcowley.bsky.social
Philip Cowley @philipjcowley.bsky.social · 5d
Latest piece for the @thehousemag.bsky.social, on the island of strangers speech and similar. Also ft Bob Hawke.

www.politicshome.com/opinion/arti...
The Professor Will See You Now: Island of strangers
Lessons in political science. This week: island of strangers
www.politicshome.com

Reposted by David M. Farrell, Ben Tonra, Stuart J. Turnbull‐Dugarte

stefanmueller.bsky.social
Stefan Müller @stefanmueller.bsky.social · 5d
UCD Graduate Studies and I have produced a Research Group Handbook template for supervisors and researchers.
The template outlines core topics, resources, and policies that groups can adapt to their needs.

➡️ Template and details: www.ucd.ie/graduatestud...

@ucddublin.bsky.social
1/2
Title page of Research Group Handbook Poster on building community through a reserach group handbook, presented at the 2025 All-Island Research Culture Network Conference in Belfast.

Reposted by Justin H. Kirkland, Stuart J. Turnbull‐Dugarte

zachdickson.bsky.social
Zach Dickson @zachdickson.bsky.social · 6d
We actually have a paper that finds exactly that!

osf.io/preprints/so...

turnbulldugarte.com
Stuart Turnbull-Dugarte @turnbulldugarte.com · 6d
Was not aware that prolific did ID validation in their recruitment which at least allow us to say that the/a real respondent did exist at some point.
phe-lim.bsky.social phelimb @phe-lim.bsky.social · 6d
I disagree. AFAIK, this was not run on Prolific, and we already have the majority of Sean's recommendations in place.
Ongoing Panelist Validation ✅
Throttling Mechanisms ✅
Panelist Professionalism ✅
Panelist Quality Checks ✅
Location Checks ✅
Identity Validation ✅
Secure Software 🟠 (partial)

Reposted by Stuart J. Turnbull‐Dugarte

phe-lim.bsky.social
phelimb @phe-lim.bsky.social · 6d
I disagree. AFAIK, this was not run on Prolific, and we already have the majority of Sean's recommendations in place.
Ongoing Panelist Validation ✅
Throttling Mechanisms ✅
Panelist Professionalism ✅
Panelist Quality Checks ✅
Location Checks ✅
Identity Validation ✅
Secure Software 🟠 (partial)

Reposted by Will Jennings, Sara B. Hobolt, Federica Genovese , and 1 more

zachdickson.bsky.social
Zach Dickson @zachdickson.bsky.social · 6d
🚨 New working paper 🚨

We often see populist parties like Reform UK blame higher energy bills on climate change policies. What are the political consequences of this strategy?

Very early draft; comments and criticisms are welcomed!

full draft: z-dickson.github.io/assets/dicks...

Reposted by Stuart J. Turnbull‐Dugarte

zdgreene.bsky.social
⭕⭕⭕ Z Greene ⭕⭕⭕ @zdgreene.bsky.social · 7d
Something is going on with this supposed AI analysis the UK EHRC undertook this summer on guidance regarding the UK Supreme Courts ruling on gender.-- It is almost certainly a purposeful manipulation or otherwise they wouldn't be so afraid of revealing it's results.
tacc.org.uk/2025/09/05/c...
Consultation in name only: EHRC blocks MPs and public from seeing the evidence - tacc.org.uk
The Equality and Human Rights Commission has quietly locked the evidence away. A Freedom of Information disclosure shows the Commission will not release its consultation report on the draft Code of Practice until after the Code has been laid before Parliament and has become statutory guidance. That means the analysis the EHRC says supports its
tacc.org.uk

turnbulldugarte.com
Stuart Turnbull-Dugarte @turnbulldugarte.com · 7d
I doubt that I will ever be able to include a better footnote.
Screengrab of endnotes for a book chapter where endnote #6 "In the spirit of erasing any reasonable doubt in the readers mind, I can confirm that, yes, I am a homosexual." is highlighted.

turnbulldugarte.com
Stuart Turnbull-Dugarte @turnbulldugarte.com · 12d
That’s what makes this a good empirical question.

Is positional accommodation still just about immigration, or are other ‘second dimension’ issues spilling over too? and - if so - does accommodation work? I don’t know the answer but I suspect, based on case of immigration, that it doesn’t.

turnbulldugarte.com
Stuart Turnbull-Dugarte @turnbulldugarte.com · 12d
I get that much of the research on mainstream parties’ positional accommodation of far-right challengers tends to focus on immigration since that is the issue where they have the strongest ownership, but perhaps climate-sceptical turns needs more attention.

Reposted by Stuart J. Turnbull‐Dugarte

eldiario.es
elDiario.es @eldiario.es · 12d
‼️ÚLTIMA HORA | El PP se alía en Europa con la ultraderecha a favor del negacionismo climático
El PP se alía en Europa con la ultraderecha a favor del negacionismo climático
Los conservadores europeos rompen su compromiso de no colaborar con la ultraderecha y votan a favor de reducir las exigencias medioambientales a las empresas. El Partido Popular español además ha vot...
www.eldiario.es

turnbulldugarte.com
Stuart Turnbull-Dugarte @turnbulldugarte.com · 12d
💯

turnbulldugarte.com
Stuart Turnbull-Dugarte @turnbulldugarte.com · 12d
Huge congratulations Honorata! 👏🏽

Reposted by Dorothy Bishop, Stefanie Walter, Jonathan Hopkin , and 3 more

benbraun.bsky.social
Benjamin Braun @benbraun.bsky.social · 13d
The central argument in this excellent paper & thread is that the open-access turn has neglected profit; indeed, it turbo-charged publishers’ margins. As political economists who know a thing or two about profit and power we should speak up a lot more. As it says below: What we’re doing is crazy.
hansonmark.bsky.social Mark A. Hanson @hansonmark.bsky.social · 14d
We wrote the Strain on scientific publishing to highlight the problems of time & trust. With a fantastic group of co-authors, we present The Drain of Scientific Publishing:

a 🧵 1/n

Drain: arxiv.org/abs/2511.04820
Strain: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...
Oligopoly: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...
A table showing profit margins of major publishers. A snippet of text related to this table is below. 1. The four-fold drain 1.1 Money Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis, which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024 alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher (Elsevier) always over 37%. Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor & Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3 billion in that year. A figure detailing the drain on researcher time. 1. The four-fold drain 1.2 Time The number of papers published each year is growing faster than the scientific workforce, with the number of papers per researcher almost doubling between 1996 and 2022 (Figure 1A). This reflects the fact that publishers’ commercial desire to publish (sell) more material has aligned well with the competitive prestige culture in which publications help secure jobs, grants, promotions, and awards. To the extent that this growth is driven by a pressure for profit, rather than scholarly imperatives, it distorts the way researchers spend their time. The publishing system depends on unpaid reviewer labour, estimated to be over 130 million unpaid hours annually in 2020 alone (9). Researchers have complained about the demands of peer-review for decades, but the scale of the problem is now worse, with editors reporting widespread difficulties recruiting reviewers. The growth in publications involves not only the authors’ time, but that of academic editors and reviewers who are dealing with so many review demands. Even more seriously, the imperative to produce ever more articles reshapes the nature of scientific inquiry. Evidence across multiple fields shows that more papers result in ‘ossification’, not new ideas (10). It may seem paradoxical that more papers can slow progress until one considers how it affects researchers’ time. While rewards remain tied to volume, prestige, and impact of publications, researchers will be nudged away from riskier, local, interdisciplinary, and long-term work. The result is a treadmill of constant activity with limited progress whereas core scholarly practices – such as reading, reflecting and engaging with others’ contributions – is de-prioritized. What looks like productivity often masks intellectual exhaustion built on a demoralizing, narrowing scientific vision. A table of profit margins across industries. The section of text related to this table is below: 1. The four-fold drain 1.1 Money Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis, which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024 alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher (Elsevier) always over 37%. Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor & Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3 billion in that year. The costs of inaction are plain: wasted public funds, lost researcher time, compromised scientific integrity and eroded public trust. Today, the system rewards commercial publishers first, and science second. Without bold action from the funders we risk continuing to pour resources into a system that prioritizes profit over the advancement of scientific knowledge.