Replication Data for Betting on the Underdog The Influence of Social Networks on Vote Choice
<|begin_of_text|><|start_header_id|>system<|end_header_id|> You are a research archivist expert in dataset metadata. Answer the question truthfully.  <|eot_id|><|start_header_id|>user<|end_header_id|> Here is the Description of a dataset. Description:'What makes people vote for an underdog? The common expectation is that people avoid wasting their vote on a party with a small probability of being elected.  Yet, many voters choose to support underdogs and we still understand little about their motivations.    We argue that voters gauge the support for their preferred party in the voting population from their social networks. When social networks exhibit the characteristics of echo chambers, a feature observed in real-life political networks, voters with a strong preference for an underdog tend to overestimate their chances of winning.  We test this claim with voting experiments in which some treatment groups receive signals from a simulated network.  We compare the effect of networks with a high degree of homogeneity against random networks.  Our findings suggest that homophilic netwo' . Please return only a json list of at most 3 Keywords corresponding to the Description:.<|eot_id|><|start_header_id|>assistant<|end_header_id|> {"Answer" : ["Voting, social network, strategic voting"]} <|eot_id|>
 Here is the Description of a dataset. Description:'What makes people vote for an underdog? The common expectation is that people avoid wasting their vote on a party with a small probability of being elected.  Yet, many voters choose to support underdogs and we still understand little about their motivations.    We argue that voters gauge the support for their preferred party in the voting population from their social networks. When social networks exhibit the characteristics of echo chambers, a feature observed in real-life political networks, voters with a strong preference for an underdog tend to overestimate their chances of winning.  We test this claim with voting experiments in which some treatment groups receive signals from a simulated network.  We compare the effect of networks with a high degree of homogeneity against random networks.  Our findings suggest that homophilic netwo' . Please return only a json list of at most 3 Keywords corresponding to the Description:.
What makes people vote for an underdog? The common expectation is that people avoid wasting their vote on a party with a small probability of being elected.  Yet, many voters choose to support underdogs and we still understand little about their motivations.    We argue that voters gauge the support for their preferred party in the voting population from their social networks. When social networks exhibit the characteristics of echo chambers, a feature observed in real-life political networks, voters with a strong preference for an underdog tend to overestimate their chances of winning.  We test this claim with voting experiments in which some treatment groups receive signals from a simulated network.  We compare the effect of networks with a high degree of homogeneity against random networks.  Our findings suggest that homophilic netwo
Voting, social network, strategic voting