Political views regarding the war in Ukraine in an online dating experiment

Beloborodova, Anna (2023): Political views regarding the war in Ukraine in an online dating experiment.

Abstract

How polarized is Russian society regarding the war in Ukraine? Political views affect various behaviors, including relationship formation. This study conducts a field experiment on a large Russian dating site and gathers data from over 3,000 profile evaluations. The findings reveal significant penalties for those who express pro-war or anti-war positions on their dating profiles. Age emerges as the most polarizing factor: younger individuals are less likely to approach pro-war profiles but not anti-war ones, whereas older individuals are less likely to respond positively to profiles indicating anti-war views but not pro-war ones. The results align with survey evidence of a positive relationship between respondents' age and expressed support for the war in Russia, although the experiment indicates a higher degree of polarization. Overall, the experimental findings demonstrate that survey data can reveal trends and relationships between individuals' characteristics and their opinions, but may overstate the levels of support for government agendas in non-democratic states.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: affective polarization; relationship formation; assortative mating; field experiment; war in Ukraine
• Subjects: C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C9 - Design of Experiments > C93 - Field Experiments; D - Microeconomics > D1 - Household Behavior and Family Economics; J - Labor and Demographic Economics > J1 - Demographic Economics > J12 - Marriage ; Marital Dissolution ; Family Structure ; Domestic Abuse

References

Abramova, O.; Baumann, A.; Krasnova, H., and Buxmann, P. Gender differences in online dating: What do we know so far? a systematic literature review. In 2016 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), pages 3858–3867. IEEE, 2016.

Alford, J. R.; Hatemi, P. K.; Hibbing, J. R.; Martin, N. G., and Eaves, L. J. The politics of mate choice. The Journal of Politics, 73(2):362–379, 2011.

Belot, M. and Francesconi, M. Dating preferences and meeting opportunities in mate choice decisions. Journal of Human Resources, 48(2):474–508, 2013.

Chapkovski, P. and Schaub, M. Do Russians tell the truth when they say they support the war in Ukraine? Evidence from a list experiment. LSE European Politics and Policy (EUROPP) blog, 2022.

Chapkovski, P. and Zakharov, A. Do Russians want to punish fellow citizens who oppose the war in Ukraine? evidence from an online experiment. LSE European Politics and Policy (EUROPP) blog, 2022.

Easton, M. J. and Holbein, J. B. The democracy of dating: How political affiliations shape relationship formation. Journal of Experimental Political Science, 8(3):260–272, 2021.

Egebark, J.; Ekstrom, M.; Plug, E., and Van Praag, M. Brains or beauty? Causal evidence on the returns to education and attractiveness in the online dating market. Journal of Public Economics, 196:104372, 2021.

Fisman, R.; Iyengar, S. S.; Kamenica, E., and Simonson, I. Gender differences in mate selection: Evidence from a speed dating experiment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 121(2):673–697, 2006.

Fisman, R.; Iyengar, S. S.; Kamenica, E., and Simonson, I. Racial preferences in dating. The Review of Economic Studies, 75(1):117–132, 2008.

Gift, K. and Gift, T. Does politics influence hiring? Evidence from a randomized experiment. Political Behavior, 37:653–675, 2015.

Hitsch, G. J.; Hortacsu, A., and Ariely, D. Matching and sorting in online dating. American Economic Review, 100(1):130–163, 2010.

Hobolt, S. B.; Leeper, T. J., and Tilley, J. Divided by the vote: Affective polarization in the wake of the Brexit referendum. British Journal of Political Science, 51(4): 1476–1493, 2021.

Huber, G. A. and Malhotra, N. Political homophily in social relationships: Evidence from online dating behavior. The Journal of Politics, 79(1):269–283, 2017.

Iyengar, S.; Konitzer, T., and Tedin, K. The home as a political fortress: Family agreement in an era of polarization. The Journal of Politics, 80(4):1326–1338, 2018.

Iyengar, S.; Lelkes, Y.; Levendusky, M.; Malhotra, N., and Westwood, S. J. The origins and consequences of affective polarization in the United States. Annual Review of Political Science, 22(1):129–146, 2019.

Jakobsson, N. and Lindholm, H. Ethnic preferences in internet dating: A field experiment. Marriage & Family Review, 50(4):307–317, 2014.

Janif, Z. J.; Brooks, R. C., and Dixson, B. J. Are preferences for women’s hair color frequency-dependent? Adaptive Human Behavior and Physiology, 1:54–71, 2015.

Kerry, N.; Al-Shawaf, L.; Barbato, M.; Batres, C.; Blake, K. R.; Cha, Y.; Chauvin, G. V.; Clifton, J. D.; Fernandez, A. M.; Galbarczyk, A., and others. Experimental and cross-cultural evidence that parenthood and parental care motives increase social conservatism. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 289(1982):20220978, 2022.

Kizilova, K. and Norris, P. Assessing Russian public opinion on the Ukraine war. Political Regime Stability/Universities/Agriculture, 29(281):2, 2022.

Klar, S. and Krupnikov, Y. Independent politics. Cambridge University Press, 2016.

Klar, S.; Krupnikov, Y., and Ryan, J. B. Affective polarization or partisan disdain? Untangling a dislike for the opposing party from a dislike of partisanship. Public Opinion Quarterly, 82(2):379–390, 2018.

Klofstad, C. A.; McDermott, R., and Hatemi, P. K. Do bedroom eyes wear political glasses? the role of politics in human mate attraction. Evolution and Human Behavior, 33(2):100–108, 2012.

List, J. A. Non est disputandum de generalizability? a glimpse into the external validity trial. Technical report, National Bureau of Economic Research, 2020.

Low, C. Pricing the biological clock: The marriage market costs of aging to women. Journal of Labor Economics, 42(2):000–000, 2024.

Ma, D. S.; Correll, J., and Wittenbrink, B. The Chicago face database: A free stimulus set of faces and norming data. Behavior research methods, 47(4):1122–1135, 2015.

McConnell, C.; Margalit, Y.; Malhotra, N., and Levendusky, M. The economic consequences of partisanship in a polarized era. American Journal of Political Science, 62(1):5–18, 2018.

Michelitch, K. Does electoral competition exacerbate interethnic or interpartisan economic discrimination? Evidence from a field experiment in market price bargaining. American Political Science Review, 109(1):43–61, 2015.

Neyt, B.; Vandenbulcke, S., and Baert, S. Are men intimidated by highly educated women? Undercover on Tinder. Economics of Education Review, 73:101914, 2019.

Neyt, B.; Baert, S., and Vynckier, J. Job prestige and mobile dating success: A field experiment. De Economist, 170(4):435–458, 2022.

Nicholson, S. P.; Coe, C. M.; Emory, J., and Song, A. V. The politics of beauty: The effects of partisan bias on physical attractiveness. Political Behavior, 38(4): 883–898, 2016.

Ong, D. Education and income attraction: an online dating field experiment. Applied Economics, 48(19):1816–1830, 2016.

Ong, D. and Wang, J. Income attraction: An online dating field experiment. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 111:13–22, 2015.

Ranzini, G.; Rosenbaum, J. E., and Tybur, J. M. Assortative (online) dating: Insights into partner choice from an experimental dating app. Computers in Human Behavior, 127:107039, 2022.

Watson, D.; Klohnen, E. C.; Casillas, A.; Nus Simms, E.; Haig, J., and Berry, D. S. Match makers and deal breakers: Analyses of assortative mating in newlywed couples. Journal of personality, 72(5):1029–1068, 2004.