IMO this is the most striking finding in this terrific paper—
Gun owners (LFAO, red circles) are much less worried about their gun being used to hurt their children or others (Question B)
What stops some people from owning guns? Perceived costs differ markedly. Only 27% of owners worry about children accessing their gun vs. 70% of uninterested non-owners. [6/19]
Why do Americans disagree so fiercely about guns? New paper with @marcellaalsan.bsky.social and Josh Schwartzstein shows owners & non-owners share a common goal — safety — but disagree sharply on whether guns achieve it 🧵 socialeconomicslab.org/research/wor... [1/19]
Overall, Americans share a common goal — safety — yet disagree about the means. Although these disagreements appear entrenched, people remain receptive to alternatives that might command broader agreement. [18/19]
Why do Americans disagree so fiercely about guns? New paper with @marcellaalsan.bsky.social and Josh Schwartzstein shows owners & non-owners share a common goal — safety — but disagree sharply on whether guns achieve it 🧵 socialeconomicslab.org/research/wor... [1/19]
(Very) rough back-of-the-envelope calculations suggest promoting NLFAs could prevent up to 8% of school shootings & 7% of child firearm-related suicides & accidental deaths, through shifts in storage behavior & substitution. [16/19]
One key insight from this work is disagreement stems in part from different beliefs about the safety frontier (what can create safety), not fundamentally different goals (most want safety). Beliefs can potentially be shifted, while preferences might be harder to move. [17/19]
Why do Americans disagree so fiercely about guns? New paper with @marcellaalsan.bsky.social and Josh Schwartzstein shows owners & non-owners share a common goal — safety — but disagree sharply on whether guns achieve it 🧵 socialeconomicslab.org/research/wor... [1/19]
Adding a Sean Hannity endorsement to the NLFA info produces larger & more persistent effects, including increased support for rules for buying lethal firearms & for safe storage policies. An endorsement by someone who owns and talks about firearms seems to matter [14/19]
Owners relinquishing firearms voluntarily appears unrealistic given the underlying quest for safety and concerns. The more tractable margins (that still matter a lot)? Safe storage & non-lethal substitution for additional purchases. [15/19]
Why do Americans disagree so fiercely about guns? New paper with @marcellaalsan.bsky.social and Josh Schwartzstein shows owners & non-owners share a common goal — safety — but disagree sharply on whether guns achieve it 🧵 socialeconomicslab.org/research/wor... [1/19]
Our Private Costs treatment — on legal & health risks of guns — increases concern about liability & boosts support for safe storage among both owners & non-owners. [12/19]
Our non-lethal firearm treatment — showing gun owners one non-lethal firearm (brand: Byrna) — raises belief that NLFAs are good replacements, interest in purchasing one & willingness to store lethal guns safely. [13/19]
Why do Americans disagree so fiercely about guns? New paper with @marcellaalsan.bsky.social and Josh Schwartzstein shows owners & non-owners share a common goal — safety — but disagree sharply on whether guns achieve it 🧵 socialeconomicslab.org/research/wor... [1/19]
We organize these patterns through a framework that emphasizes the "Safety Possibilities Frontier" (SPF) — the safety outcomes achievable with different tools. Our descriptive analysis shows owners & non-owners perceive this frontier very differently. [10/19]
Our descriptive evidence points to beliefs about the frontier as a key driver of disagreement. Our experiments aim to shift this perceived SPF — by informing people about private costs of guns & about non-lethal alternatives. [11/19]
Why do Americans disagree so fiercely about guns? New paper with @marcellaalsan.bsky.social and Josh Schwartzstein shows owners & non-owners share a common goal — safety — but disagree sharply on whether guns achieve it 🧵 socialeconomicslab.org/research/wor... [1/19]
Groups also diverge on social costs: non-owners are far more likely to believe gun ownership increases crime, murders, suicides & school shootings. Owners are the least likely to hold these views. [8/19]
Importantly, there is widespread unawareness of non-lethal alternatives. Only 4% of owners have one & only 20% had heard of a specific one. Yet 43% say they would prefer a firearm that incapacitates rather than kills. ⬇️ [9/19]
Why do Americans disagree so fiercely about guns? New paper with @marcellaalsan.bsky.social and Josh Schwartzstein shows owners & non-owners share a common goal — safety — but disagree sharply on whether guns achieve it 🧵 socialeconomicslab.org/research/wor... [1/19]
What stops some people from owning guns? Perceived costs differ markedly. Only 27% of owners worry about children accessing their gun vs. 70% of uninterested non-owners. [6/19]
How does owning a gun make you feel? Owners report safety, confidence & responsibility. Uninterested non-owners? Nervousness, fear & feeling unsafe. Same goal, opposite perceptions. [7/19]
Why do Americans disagree so fiercely about guns? New paper with @marcellaalsan.bsky.social and Josh Schwartzstein shows owners & non-owners share a common goal — safety — but disagree sharply on whether guns achieve it 🧵 socialeconomicslab.org/research/wor... [1/19]
Strikingly, demand is asymmetric: 1/3 of non-owners are interested in acquiring a gun, but only 7% of owners would consider reducing their holdings even with a non-lethal alternative. 62% are considering acquiring more. [4/19]1
Both owners & uninterested non-owners feel similarly safe in daily life (~80%). But interested non-owners feel much less safe (58%) & trust police slightly less — they have an unmet demand for safety. [5/19]
Why do Americans disagree so fiercely about guns? New paper with @marcellaalsan.bsky.social and Josh Schwartzstein shows owners & non-owners share a common goal — safety — but disagree sharply on whether guns achieve it 🧵 socialeconomicslab.org/research/wor... [1/19]
We survey 5,400+ US respondents, gun owners & non-owners, combined with randomized experiments. Within non-owners, we distinguish those interested in acquiring a gun (1/3 of them!) from those not interested. [2/19]
**Safety** is THE overriding motivation. >80% of gun owners cite protecting their family or themselves as the main reason for ownership. Among interested non-owners, 56% cite family protection & 34% self-protection. ⬇️ [3/19]
What do people think causes #inflation? @s-stantcheva.bsky.social's surveys reveal the gulf between how economists & the public understand inflation. Learn more in this Economist in Action video: youtu.be/orXTKWsP74o?... Made possible by @uolondon.bsky.social & the Convocation Trust.
"To understand America today, study the zero-sum mindset." My piece in @theeconomistevents.bsky.social this week on how zero-sum thinking arises and why it matters so much for policy and politics. Based on our research at the Social Economics Lab. www.economist.com/by-invitatio...
Join us in sending huge congratulations to @harvard.edu professor @s-stantcheva.bsky.social on this accomplishment! 🎉🙌
Stefanie was also one of the first #EGgrantee(s), and her EG-funded research on the effects of taxation on innovation is referenced as a major contribution to the field.
#EconSky
Congratulations to Stefanie Stantcheva (@s-stantcheva.bsky.social) of @harvard.edu, winner of the 2025 John Bates Clark Medal! #econskywww.aeaweb.org/about-aea/ho...
👏 Big congratulations to @s-stantcheva.bsky.social for being named the 2025 Clark Medalist!
Her research bridges theory, data, and public opinion—shaping the future of economic policy.
#ClarkMedal#Economics#PolicyResearch#Harvard#econsky
🔗Read more: inomics.com/news/stefani...
Congratulations to Stefanie Stantcheva (@s-stantcheva.bsky.social) of @harvard.edu, winner of the 2025 John Bates Clark Medal! #econskywww.aeaweb.org/about-aea/ho...
@s-stantcheva.bsky.social, Professor of Political Economy at @harvard.edu and Founder of @socialeconomicslab.bsky.social, is the newest addition to our Forward Thinkers list.
Explore our full Forward Thinkers list at the link. bit.ly/4kCDdal#PS30
Congratulations to HCEO member
@s-stantcheva.bsky.social, who won this year’s John Bates Clark Medal from the AEA. The award recognizes her wide-ranging work that probes the impact of innovation, immigration, and investments in education. So well deserved!
www.aeaweb.org/news/press-r...
Huge congratulations to #CIDFacultyAffiliate Stefanie Stantcheva (@s-stantcheva.bsky.social) for being awarded the 2025 Clark Medal from the American Economics Association. Well deserved!
Congratulations to Stefanie Stantcheva (@s-stantcheva.bsky.social) of @harvard.edu, winner of the 2025 John Bates Clark Medal! #econskywww.aeaweb.org/about-aea/ho...
Congratulations @s-stantcheva.bsky.social on the John Bates Clark Medal. One of the most prestigious AEA awards, awarded annually each April to an American economist under forty. Judged to have made the most significant contribution to economic thought and knowledge www.aeaweb.org/about-aea/ho...
CEPR congratulates CEPR Research Fellow
@s-stantcheva.bsky.social, who has been awarded the 2025 John Bates Clark Medal for her significant contributions to the field of public economics through her rigorous analysis and innovative methods.
cepr.org/about/news/s...#EconSky
Deeply honored and humbled by this recognition from the @aeainformation.bsky.social. I owe so much to my co-authors, colleagues, mentors, students & many others: support, inspiration, generosity. Endlessly grateful for all I have learned from you & hope to continue contributing to our field
Congratulations to Stefanie Stantcheva (@s-stantcheva.bsky.social) of @harvard.edu, winner of the 2025 John Bates Clark Medal! #econskywww.aeaweb.org/about-aea/ho...
Super honored to be included in @projectsyndicate.bsky.social Forward Thinkers list, launched to mark their 30th anniversary and highlight 30 global voices shaping the future of public debate. Explore the full list and learn more about their work here: forwardthinkers1.project-syndicate.org. #PS30
Regarding trade -- our research shows that only 25% of Americans *disagree with the idea that international trade is zero-sum* — that if one country gains, another must lose. Most people either believe it is zero-sum or aren’t sure. socialeconomicslab.org/research/wor...
The zero-sum mindset seems more and more relevant in the current environment. Thank you @harvardmagazine.bsky.social
for the video where I explain our research on why zero-sum thinking is so important and where it comes from.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=e16o...
Zero-sum thinking is a key mindset that shapes how we view the world. A little thread to highlight our work on its roots with @sahilchinoy.bsky.social,
@nathannunn.bsky.social, Sandra Sequeira.🧵1/23 scholar.harvard.edu/files/stantc...
One challenge for trade policy, is that the benefits to consumers (like lower prices) feel vague & abstract—it's hard to see what we'd lose without free trade. Job threats feel immediate, driving support for protectionism. More recent on views on trade👇
1/19: Seems timely to share a paper which explores how people perceive & understand trade and trade policies. Which factors shape the support for different trade policies? Thread below with the key takeaways #EconTwitter 🧵, and full paper here: socialeconomicslab.org/understandin...