Resume

• 2012

  University of Minnesota

  American Educational Research Association

  Greater Minneapolis-St. Paul Area

  Doctoral Candidate

  University of Minnesota

  The Pew Charitable Trusts

  Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.)

  Political Science

  Minor in Political Psychology

  University of Minnesota-Twin Cities

• 2009

  National Science Foundation

  Carleton College

  National Science Foundation

  Interim Program Manager

  Grants Program

  American Educational Research Association

• 2008

  Summer Institute in Political Psychology

• 2007

  Master of Arts

  Political Science

• 2004

  Colorado State University

  Northfield

  Minnesota

  Assistant Professor

  Carleton College

  Colorado State University

• 2003

  Spanish

  Arabic

  Bachelor of Arts

  Political Science and Psychology

• Christina Farhart

  Personal website for Christina E. Farhart

  Christina Farhart

  Minnesota Political Methodology Colloquium

  Minnesota Political Methodology Colloquium (MPMC) website

  Minnesota Political Methodology Colloquium (MPMC) website!

  Christina Farhart

  Personal website for Christina E. Farhart

  Christina Farhart

  CHRISTINA FARHART

  Website

   View CV 

  Personal Website

  GiveMN

  Volunteer

  Open Arms of Minnesota

  Data Analysis

  Research

  Qualitative Research

  Public Speaking

  Grants

  Fundraising

  Student Affairs

  Event Planning

  Higher Education

  Grant Writing

  Student Development

  Conspiracy Endorsement as Motivated Reasoning: The Moderating Roles of Political Knowledge and Trust

  Kyle Saunders

  Joanne Miller

  American Journal of Political Science

  Abstract: Given the potential political and social significance of conspiracy beliefs

  a substantial and growing body of work examines the individual-level correlates of belief in conspiracy theories and general conspiratorial predispositions. However

  although we know much about the psychological antecedents of conspiracy endorsement

  we know less about the individual-level political causes of these prevalent and consequential beliefs. Our work draws from the extant literature to posit that endorsement of conspiracy theories is a motivated process that serves both ideological and psychological needs. In doing so

  we develop a theory that identifies a particular type of person—one who is both highly knowledgeable about politics and lacking in trust—who is most susceptible to ideologically motivated conspiracy endorsement. Further

  we demonstrate that the moderators of belief in conspiracy theories are strikingly different for conservatives and liberals.\n\nReplication Materials: The data

  code

  and any additional materials required to replicate all analyses in this article are available on the American Journal of Political Science Dataverse within the Harvard Dataverse Network

  at: http://dx.doi.org/10.7910/DVN/O3A06T.

  Conspiracy Endorsement as Motivated Reasoning: The Moderating Roles of Political Knowledge and Trust

  et al.

  Hannah Kim

  Elizabeth Housholder

  Pierce Ekstrom

  Timothy Callaghan

  Eugene Borgida

  Jacob Appleby

  Philip Chen

  Abstract: In an analysis of the 2012 presidential election

  we sought to optimize two key desiderata in capturing campaign effects: establishing causality and measuring dynamic (i.e.

  intraindividual) change over time. We first report the results of three survey-experiments embedded within a three-wave survey panel design. Each experiment was focused on a substantive area of electoral concern. Our results suggest

  among other findings

  that retrospective evaluations exerted a stronger influence on vote choice in the referendum (vs. the choice) frame; that among White respondents

  racial animosity strongly predicted economic evaluations for knowledgeable Republicans who were led to believe that positive economic developments were the result of actions taken by the Obama administration; and that information-seeking bias is a contingent phenomenon

  one depending jointly on the opportunity and motivation to selectively tune in to congenial information. Lastly

  we demonstrate how the panel design also allowed us to (1) examine the reliability and stability of a variety of election-related implicit attitudes

  and to assess their impact on candidate evaluation; and (2) determine the causal impact of perceptions of candidates’ traits and respondents’ policy preferences on electoral preferences

  and vice versa

  an area of research long plagued by concerns about endogeneity.

  The Minnesota Multi-Investigator 2012 Presidential Election Panel Study

  Christina

  The Pew Charitable Trusts