And given the uncertainty in our estimates — a concept most Americans now understand thanks to last week's election results — we can not rule out the possibility that private schools have a modest impact (positive or negative)
on voter behavior.
Not exact matches
The calls for greater scrutiny followed reports
on Saturday in The New York Times and The Observer of London that Cambridge Analytica, a political data firm founded by Stephen K. Bannon and Robert Mercer, the wealthy Republican donor, had used the Facebook data to develop methods that it claimed could identify the personalities of individual American
voters and influence their
behavior.
It, too, ranks
voters from zero to 100, but this one doesn't assess
voters» characteristics so much as prioritize them based
on their susceptibility to the campaign's efforts to modify their
behavior.
With the «swamp of criminality and unethical
behavior in Albany» and «
voter disgust» at unprecedented heights, the time for reform is now, before the end of the legislative session
on June 20th.
Given all this curious
behavior, the
voters in Clarkstown should take a long, hard look at Councilwoman Lasker's track record before blindly voting
on row A in November.
John Antonakis and Olaf Dalgas hypothesized that because «naïve» ratings based solely
on facial appearance correlate with actual
voter behavior,
voters and children might have a lot in common.
«It's not a stretch, then, to imagine a rollback of federal policies that support high academic standards and quality school options could shift
behavior among these
voters on a broader scale.»
The improvements included using larger fonts, lists, headers, white space, simple language, and logical organization.29 In a study of
voter behavior, Reilly and Richey found that increasing language complexity
on ballots made
voters more likely to skip ballot questions.30 Rogers and Brown found that subjects who received «high - impact» instructions complied with those instructions at a significantly higher rate than the group that received instructions in the «low - impact» style.31 Finally, McGlone and Tofighbakhsh found that readers presented with two phrases with identical meaning more readily accepted and believed the version of the phrase that rhymed.
Cambridge Analytica, a political data firm hired by President Trump's 2016 election campaign, gained access to information
on 50 million Facebook users as a way to identify the personalities of American
voters and influence their
behavior.
Now, concerns about sharing every aspect of life
on social media are coming to a head amid reports that a political consulting firm hired by President Donald Trump's campaign allegedly used ill - gotten Facebook data in an effort to influence
voter behavior.
The emphasis
on psychology differentiates it from traditional data firms that specialize in «microtargeting,» which tracks consumer data and
behavior to target
voters; their method was was, wrote Bloomberg's Sasha Issenberg, «the most audacious new analytical innovation foisted
on American politics this year.»
Reports
on Saturday from the New York Times and the Observer of London said that Cambridge Analytica, a political data firm founded by former Trump aide Stephen K. Bannon and wealthy Republican donor Robert Mercer, had used the Facebook data to develop methods that could identify the personalities of individual American
voters and influence their
behavior.
The document goes
on to list a dozen products and services, among them «psychographic microtargeting,» «addressable TV microtargeting,» «multi-agent system
voter behavior simulation,» and «message testing & development.»