turgut keskintürk
@tkeskinturk.bsky.social
1.3K followers 240 following 59 posts
sociology phd candidate @duke | https://tkeskinturk.github.io/
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
Pinned
tkeskinturk.bsky.social
a new working paper: osf.io/vsr5b

I propose a three-stage model of cohortization where dynamics of cohort learning and political sorting serve as complementary engines of aggregate political change.

I apply this to the case of the killing of George Floyd & the BLM.

it's also my job market paper!
Generational Imprinting: How Political Events Shape Cohorts

Turgut Keskintürk
August, 2025

How, and for whom, do political events translate into enduring political change? This article advances a three-stage model of cohortization, in which salient events produce age differential changes in attitudes, elite cues drive identity-congruent political sorting, and life-course timing regulates whether these attitude changes remain persistent over time. Focusing on the killing of George Floyd and the Black Lives Matter protests in the summer of 2020 as a quasi-natural experiment, I test this model by analyzing attitudes toward U.S. law enforcement among non-Hispanic White Americans using five surveys that collectively span from 2016 to 2024. The findings consistently show that Democrats and Independents became strongly unfavorable toward law enforcement—much more so among younger than older individuals. Moreover, the changes persisted for younger individuals, while fading among older individuals, leading to cohort-led polarization. This article integrates two classic—though largely partial—theories of political learning, offering a model for understanding how salient events can realign generational divides.
Reposted by turgut keskintürk
acastroaraujo.bsky.social
Data available upon request
impavid.us
In honor of spooky month, share a 4 word horror story that only someone in your profession would understand

I'll go first: Six page commercial lease.
Reposted by turgut keskintürk
tkeskinturk.bsky.social
I think the issue is that those viewpoints are not "substantive" enough.

[added a comment to Andrew's post after seeing it here]:
One possibility is to argue that social scientists avoid hypotheses or arguments that go against their political interests. While this feels true anecdotally (e.g., I know I raise eyebrows at sociology meetings when I say things like “evolution”), this is not in itself an evidence of scholarly practices gone wrong. It seems more plausible to expect that I or someone else should be able to formulate these hypotheses precisely, document them through appropriate methods, and publish the findings using rigorous methods. I don’t see any such substantive minority of ideas that is supposed to change how social science works today.

Another possibility is to argue that even if such work exists, it’s being censored in academia. Now, that seems more plausible (after all, people may avoid publishing normatively bad findings or avoid studying them altogether), but even if that’s the case for quite many people, one would expect that this research would circulate via some kind of “samizdat,” perhaps via arXiv or some other medium. That doesn’t seem to be happening either.
tkeskinturk.bsky.social
absolutely agree with this.

and the former is simply antithetical to scholarly autonomy.
tkeskinturk.bsky.social
I think the issue is that those viewpoints are not "substantive" enough.

[added a comment to Andrew's post after seeing it here]:
One possibility is to argue that social scientists avoid hypotheses or arguments that go against their political interests. While this feels true anecdotally (e.g., I know I raise eyebrows at sociology meetings when I say things like “evolution”), this is not in itself an evidence of scholarly practices gone wrong. It seems more plausible to expect that I or someone else should be able to formulate these hypotheses precisely, document them through appropriate methods, and publish the findings using rigorous methods. I don’t see any such substantive minority of ideas that is supposed to change how social science works today.

Another possibility is to argue that even if such work exists, it’s being censored in academia. Now, that seems more plausible (after all, people may avoid publishing normatively bad findings or avoid studying them altogether), but even if that’s the case for quite many people, one would expect that this research would circulate via some kind of “samizdat,” perhaps via arXiv or some other medium. That doesn’t seem to be happening either.
Reposted by turgut keskintürk
tkeskinturk.bsky.social
cultural sociologists often get too attached to “patterns.”

culturalists reward good "images" as marks of insight (I like making them too), but I wonder if we’ve become a bit too obsessed with them.
tkeskinturk.bsky.social
this is a great take:
acastroaraujo.bsky.social
IMO, one of the big differences between early and contemporary formal analysis of culture is that we are starting to move away from visualization as a form of explanation.

What John Mohr called "iconic."
Reposted by turgut keskintürk
tkeskinturk.bsky.social
demographer, ethnographer, and the Guy Obsessed with Networks.
evangelinewarren.com
assistant professor, associate professor, grad student
the coach of the KC Chiefs, Travis Kelce, and Patrick Mahomes. From left to right they are wearing (1) a very normal grey suit with red tie, (2) a newsboy cap in brown with a shirt that looks like a bad motel wallpaper, and (3) a barbie-esque italian table cloth vest
tkeskinturk.bsky.social
ah, my nemesis... so we meet again.
"Running MCMC with 4 parallel chains..."
tkeskinturk.bsky.social
4% of Americans say "yes" to "have you ever been decapitated?"
chadbourn.bsky.social
1% of US adults have never heard of Trump.
A new Pew Research Center survey of 3,445 U.S. adults finds:
Views of Trump, Vance and congressional leaders in both parties are all more negative than positive % who say that they have a(n)
_ view of ...
Donald Trump (R)
Unfavorable
58
Favorable
40
JD Vance (R)
51
40
Never heard of
1
8
Mike Johnson (R)
John Thune (R)
38
26
25
36
16
Hakeem Jeffries (D)
30
56
45
Chuck Schumer (D)
50
24
21
26
Note: No answer responses are not shown.
Source: Survey of U.S. adults conducted Sept. 22-28, 2025.
PEW RESEARCH CENTER
tkeskinturk.bsky.social
who's your favourite jedi? (wrong answers only).
dale cooper.
Reposted by turgut keskintürk
patrickstotz.bsky.social
Found in my parents' basement. #dataviz from the 1932 Olympics
tkeskinturk.bsky.social
I believe that the experimental paradigm in "polarization research" should receive strong criticism for its thin conception of political culture. I make this argument in a new blog post.

Experiments Can’t Reduce Partisan Animosity
tkeskinturk.github.io/blog/experiments
The Question of Manipulability

I believe that this is a long-overdue correction for a reason. Much of the literature on polarization has operated under a tacit assumption: that political attitudes are malleable.

If you frame an issue one way, you can shift people’s support for particular candidates. If you “humanize” out-partisans, animosity declines. If you push people into a room and make them discuss a question for 15 minutes, you see that ideology is more moderate than it would be1. The implicit theory of political culture operating here is that people’s ideologies are weak, malleable, and ready to be channeled into something “good” if only we have the “right” intervention.

1 That is, they are more likely to be 2, 3, or 4 in a Likert scale than being 1 or 5 on a 5-point scale.
tkeskinturk.bsky.social
people's opinions are formed through a combination of long-lasting exposures and political socialization, and we should not expect one-shot experimental settings to *scale* in the first place.

this is such a needed correction to the "polarization" literature:
brendannyhan.bsky.social
Depolarization is not "a scalable solution for reducing societal-level conflict.... achieving lasting depolarization will likely require....moving beyond individual-level treatments to address the elite behaviors and structural incentives that fuel partisan conflict" www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/...
Reposted by turgut keskintürk
johnpfaff.bsky.social
I mean, we are living in two different realities now, and this really hasn't always been the case.
Partisan views on "more crime": used to move fairly closely, but now radically different (90% say up for GOP, 29% for Dems).
tkeskinturk.bsky.social
cultural evolution folks pretty much moved past "the Question on California & Paris," but it is still a valuable lens to think about sociology's core problems.

here are some of my reflections on transmission & directionality.

Thinking About California and Paris
tkeskinturk.github.io/blog/attactors
Consider a simple thought experiment to flesh this out. Three toddlers are (with a social science magic) hanging out on an island. They have ordinary perceptual capacities, but no shared language, institutions, or instructors. If categories are indeed social in origin, then before a “society” forms, these toddlers will have certain perceptions and proto-concepts, but will lack properly standardized cultural schemas. As interactions deepen (because, hey, why not?), pressures for coordination and disputes over resources and authority will force solutions to emerge. Through ritual, sanction, and pedagogy, those solutions will be codified into social templates for categories, anchored in a specific place and time, and faithfully preserved across generations.

But what kinds of solutions do we end up with? If we keep mercilessly sending different toddlers to different islands, how do we get a green, a blue or a grue?