Most research in comparative political behavior sees behavior as a consequence of an individual's intrinsic motivations, such as their attitudes or preferences. Building on multidisciplinary literature in social psychology and behavioral economics, my work argues that this view is often ill-founded. Extrinsic motivations, like social norms, can upset the translation of preferences and attitudes into behavior.
Much of my research (including my book on the normalization of the radical right) builds on this argument to examine how social norms affect the expression of preferences associated with authoritarianism. I argue that recent increases in extremist and anti-democratic behavior cannot be fully explained by individuals' preferences becoming, themselves, more extremist or anti-democratic. A large portion of individuals had long held these preferences, but hid them to avoid judgement and social punishment (for evidence of this falsification of political preferences, see this paper). Upon feeling that their preferences have become more acceptable, they feel more comfortable acting on what they already thought in private (for evidence on this process of normalization, see this paper or this paper).
In more recent work, I study a number of additional related questions, like the process of formation of norms against some political preferences (see this ongoing project), the micro-level mechanisms through which those norms are enforced (see this paper), or how political norms affect politicians (see this paper).
You can find a list of my publications, working papers and work currently in progress under Publications.
​​