Activism

Expect The Worst? Political Scientists Have a Pessimism Bias, Study Finds

The research, co-authored by UC Berkeley political scientist Andrew T. Little, offers a possible solution: an approach that aggregates experts’ predictions, finds the middle ground, and then reduces the influence of pessimism, leading to the possibility of “remarkably accurate predictions.”

Published

3 months ago

January 6, 2025

Oakland Post

Fears of unknown political outcomes. iStock image.

Political experts surveyed recently were prone to pessimism — and were often wrong, says a study co-authored at UC Berkeley. Still, when their predictions were averaged out, they were ‘remarkably accurate’

By Edward Lempinen, UC Berkeley News

The past decade has seen historic challenges for U.S. democracy and an intense focus by scholars on events that seem to signal democratic decline. But new research released two weeks ago finds that a bias toward pessimism among U.S. political scientists often leads to inaccurate predictions about the future threats to democracy.

The study was released by Bright Line Watch, a consortium of political scientists who focus on issues related to the health of U.S. democracy. It offers provocative insight into political scientists’ predictions for the months ahead, including some that would be seen as alarming risks for democracy.

According to an analysis that Little distilled from a Bright Line Watch survey done after the November election, political scientists generally agreed that incoming Republican President Donald Trump is highly likely to pardon MAGA forces imprisoned for roles in the Jan. 6, 2021 uprising that sought to block the peaceful transfer of power from Trump to Democrat Joe Biden.

The research concluded that it’s less likely, but still probable, that Trump will pardon himself from a series of federal criminal convictions and investigations, and that his allies will open an investigation of Biden.

In understanding the future course of U.S. politics, Little said in an interview, it’s important to listen to the consensus of expert political scientists rather than to individual experts who, sometimes, become media figures based on their dire predictions.

“If we’re worried about being excessively pessimistic,” he explained, “and if we don’t want to conclude that every possible bad thing is going to happen, then we should make sure that we’re mainly worrying about things where there is wider consensus (among political scientists).”

Believe the Consensus, Doubt the Outliers

For example, the raw data from hundreds of survey responses studied by Little and Bright Line researchers showed that more than half of the political scientists also expected Trump to form a board that would explore the removal of generals; deport millions of immigrants; and initiate a mass firing of civil service government employees.

But once the researchers aggregated the scholars’ opinions, determined the average of their expectations and controlled for their pessimism bias, the consensus was that the likelihood of those developments falls well below 50%.

Bright Line Watch, founded in 2016, is based at the Chicago Center on Democracy and is collaboratively run by political scientists at the University of Chicago, Dartmouth College, the University of Michigan and the University of Rochester in New York.

The research collaboration between Little and the Bright Line Watch scholars sprang from a collegial disagreement that emerged last January in the pages of the journal Political Science and Politics.

Little and Anne Meng, a political scientist at the University of Virginia, authored a research paper in that issue positing that there is little empirical, data-based evidence of global democratic decline in the past decade.

At the request of the journal editors, scholars at Bright Line Watch submitted a study to counter the argument made by Meng and Little.

But in subsequent weeks, the two teams came together and, in the study released on Dec. 17, found agreement that raw opinion on the state of democracy skews toward pessimism among the political scientists who have participated in the surveys run by Bright Line Watch.

A Stark Measure of Pessimism (and Error)

Surveys conducted during election seasons in 2020, 2022 and 2024 asked political scientists to provide their forecasts on dozens of scenarios that would be, without doubt, harmful for democracy.

The raw data in the new study showed a high level of inaccuracy in the forecasts: While the political scientists, on average, found a 45% likelihood of the negative events happening, fewer than 25% actually came to pass.

Before last month’s election, Bright Line Watch asked the political scientists to assess dozens of possibilities that seemed to be ripped from the headlines. Would foreign hackers cripple voting systems? Would Trump or Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic candidate, declare victory before the winner was called by the news media? Would Trump incite political violence again?

Altogether, the political scientists predicted a 44% probability for the list of negative events — but only 10% actually happened.

In the interview, Little defended the focus on possible negative developments by political scientists and others. It’s “very important” to be aware of the potential for harmful developments, he said.

But the focus on worst-case scenarios can also be distracting and destabilizing. The question, then, is why political scientists might develop a bias for pessimism.

To some extent, Little said, it may be a matter of expertise. The data show that scholars who specialize in American politics tend to be the least pessimistic — and the most accurate — forecasters. Political scientists with expertise in international relations, political theory or other areas tend to be more pessimistic and less reliable.

Little offered several other possible explanations. For example, he said, when scholars focus on one narrow area, like threats to democracy, they might see the potential threats with a heightened urgency. Their worry might shape the way they see the wider political world.

“People who study authoritarian politics are probably drawn to that because they think it’s an important problem, and they think it’s a problem that we need to address,” he explained. “If you spend a lot of your time and effort focusing on bad scenarios that might happen, you might end up thinking they’re more likely than they really are.”

And occasionally, he said, scholars may find that raising alarms about imminent dangers to democracy leads to more media invitations.

The Battle for Scholars’ Public Credibility

For the interwoven fields of political science and journalism — and for the wider health of democracy — accuracy is essential. That’s the value of the analytical system described by the authors of the new study. If researchers can find the expert consensus on complex issues and tone down unwarranted alarm, understanding should improve, and democracy should operate more efficiently.

Still, Little cautioned, it would be a mistake to discount or discard the insights offered by expert political scientists.

“You don’t want to say, ‘I’m just going to ignore the experts,’” he advised. “This research shows that that would be a very bad idea. Once you do the adjustments, the experts are very informed, and you can learn a lot from what they say.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Up Next

Port of Oakland to Host January Meeting for Interfaith Council of Alameda County

Don't Miss

UC Berkeley’s 2024 Winter Commencement: A Day of Reflection, Celebration and Advice

Oakland Post

Click to comment

Activism

Oakland Post: Week of March 19 – 25, 2025

The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of March 19 – 25, 2025

Published

18 hours ago

March 22, 2025

Oakland Post

To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

San Francisco Is Investing Millions to Address Food Insecurity. Is Oakland Doing the Same?

There are over 350 grocery programs across San Francisco. Less than a handful in District 10, a neighborhood classified as a food desert, and includes Hunters Point, one of the lowest income areas in the city.

Published

5 days ago

March 17, 2025

Oakland Post

The San Francisco District 10 Community Market is a fully government funded free grocery store for families in need of food assistance. The market is located in Hunters Point, one of the lowest income areas in the city. Photo by Magaly Muñoz.

By Magaly Muñoz

On a Thursday evening in February, Marquez Boyd walked along the aisles of San Francisco’s District 10 Community Market looking for eggs and fresh produce to take home to his children. He has been trying new recipes with ingredients he previously couldn’t afford or access.

“I learned how to cook greens since they got a lot of fresh greens here,” Boyd said. “All that stuff is better and more healthy for my kids because they’re still young.”

Meals filled with fresh produce are now possible for Boyd since the District 10 market in Hunters Point opened in 2024 when Bayview Senior Services, a non-profit running the program, received a $5 million investment from the city of San Francisco.

The market is a twist on a traditional food bank, where people can often wait in long lines for pre-bagged groceries they may not need. Here, the goal is to offer people in need a more traditional grocery store setting, with a bigger range of healthy options and less shame for needing assistance.

It’s a twist that Boyd appreciated. “This set up is way better as opposed to maybe like a food bank line,” he said. “It’s easier and faster.”

Similar models exist in Santa Barbara and Tennessee.

Census Bureau data show that the median income for households in the 94124 zip code, where Hunters Point is located, is just under $83,000 annually. Black households earn about $46,000, Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islanders earn almost $41,000, and Hispanic households make just above the median income- an average of $86,000.

Located at 5030 3rd Street, the aisles are lined with fresh produce, canned goods, bread and snacks. While refrigerators and freezers in the back of the market are filled with dairy products and meat.

The best part- everything inside is free for eligible customers.

The San Francisco District 10 Community Market is stocked with fresh produce, dairy, meat and chicken, bread, and cultural food staples. Directors of the market say they pride themselves on providing healthy options for community members. Photo by Magaly Muñoz.

“The interesting thing about this market is that it’s a city-funded effort to create something besides the average food line to give more dignity and choice than is normally given to low-income people,” said Cathy Davis, executive director of Bayview Senior Services.

Davis said people feel more comfortable coming into the market because they can choose the food they want and at a time that’s convenient for them.

Boyd, a single father of two kids, recently lost his job and relied on his sister’s generosity before discovering the market. He comes to market when he gets off of work in the evening.

“It’s a lot of people in these communities that don’t get a chance to eat healthy,” Boyd said. “They don’t have the money to go to grocery stores to buy expensive stuff.”

Another shopper, Rhonda Hudson, said the market helped her meet her grandson’s diet-related health problems. She used to travel outside the neighborhood for affordable groceries, but now she no longer has to.

According to the city’s Human Services Agency, there are no plans to expand the markets in San Francisco due to budget constraints.

But Davis isn’t worried about losing the market funding.

“City leaders were on board with creating it and finding the money to put it together so I would say we didn’t have to advocate because it came through the government. Now it’s our job to keep it going to prove that it’s a pilot worth maintaining,” Davis said.

District 10 Supervisor Shamann Walton, who co-sponsored the ordinance, said that projects like the market are “essential to our neighborhoods,” where access to affordable food has been a challenge.

“Investing in local community markets helps ensure that families have reliable, healthy food options close to home, addressing food insecurity and supporting the well-being of our community regardless of income,” Walton said.

Rhonda Hudson is a shopper of the District 10 Community Market in San Francisco. The fresh produce she gets at the free grocery store program helps her grandson, who has a diet-related illness, stay healthy. Photo by Magaly Muñoz.

Why Not Oakland?

Only slightly larger than San Francisco, Oakland has over 400 food distribution sites. Oakland provides grants to nonprofit-run organizations who run grocery programs. But in recent months, the city has begun to reduce those, forcing some organizations to regroup, and making it challenging to implement a community market similar to San Francisco’s.

The Oakland Post repeatedly reached out to city and county officials for comment on the story but did not receive a response.

At several food banks across West and East Oakland, residents shared their frustrations about long lines, wilting produce, and limited food choices.

At one food bank, located at Christian Tabernacle Church, a young mother, who requested anonymity for privacy reasons, waited in the rain for over three hours for a single bag of groceries.

“I like to get here early because I get better [quality] fruits and vegetables,” she said. She added that it’s not a lot of food that she receives for her family, but it helps close the gap when her budget is tight.

Behind her, several other women waited their turn. Neither the timing of the distribution nor the location of the food bank fit their schedules, the women said, but their choices feel limited.

Only a handful of Oakland food bank sites operate throughout the day, like the San Francisco market. Most food distribution programs are sustained by Alameda County Food Bank, not by city funding. Private grants and donations also help fund the programs.

Securing city funding is increasingly challenging. Oakland faces a $130 million budget shortfall, with a projected $280 million deficit in the next biennial cycle. Citing budget concerns, the city has reduced numerous department budgets and grants. One of those cuts included slashing the longstanding SOS Meals on Wheels grant, which helped provide food to 3,000 seniors.

Charlie Deterline, executive director of Meals on Wheels, said the termination of their $150,000 annual grant could mean that Oakland residents might see a change in the amount of meals they receive. The organization has gone 19 months without funding from that grant, Deterline said, but “continued working on good faith from the city” because they were assured they would be paid out. Now, Deterline is having doubts.

The program also received a grant of more than $125,000 from the Sugar Sweetened Beverage Tax. Yet, on June 12, the city informed grant recipients that the funding could be rescinded in order to balance the budget. That ultimately happened, said Deterline.

“Oakland is by far the most expensive city for us to operate in. It is also where the greatest need is – for us to meet that need, it will take the entire community coming together,” Deterline said.

From the sugar tax, money from that measure is also not being allocated correctly as the majority of the funding has been used to fund government services, said members of the SSB tax advisory board.

The tax generates around $7 million annually. 25% to 40% of the funding goes towards grants for community based organizations instead of the 60% allocation that the SSBT advisory board recommended the city to use for health programs. The rest of the funding goes to the city, according to Oakland’s mid-cycle budget.

Advisory board member Dwayne Aikens said he’s not sure Oakland will ever renew the grants that have been cut from this tax. “I’m looking at the conditions of the city and I’m not optimistic,” Aikens said. “If they don’t have the money now, I don’t think they’ll have the money in the future.”

Aikens said the tax was “kind of a waste.” He’s heard displeasure from the community about the lack of funding into Black and Brown neighborhoods, groups who typically live in areas of Oakland that see health and income disparities.

Meanwhile, the Community Market, which reflects the diversity of the Bayview Hunters Point community, is investing in over 800 of the city’s most vulnerable households. In-store staff and directors speak the languages common to the area and the program provides a culture-of-the week selection of foods for those interested in trying something new.

Davis said it’s up to local municipalities to ensure that residents don’t go to bed hungry, and investments need to be made in order to combat the pockets of neighborhoods who are on the brink of food insecurity.

“That’s just such a core responsibility and a core goal of everyone, to make sure that people are fed and healthy. It’s not a luxury item,” Davis said. “It’s something that needs to happen, whether we’re in a budget crisis or not.”

Reporter Magaly Muñoz produced this story as part of a series as a 2024 USC Annenberg Center for Health Journalism Data Fellow and Engagement Grantee.