VRscores: A New Measure and Data Set of Workforce Politics Using Voter Registrations

References

• Achen C, Bartels L (2016) Democracy for realists: Why Elections Do Not Produce Responsive Government, Princeton Studies in Political Behavior (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ansolabehere S, de Figueiredo JM, Snyder JM (2003) Why is there so little money in U.S. politics? J. Econom. Perspect. 17(1):105–130.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Babenko I, Fedaseyeu V, Zhang S (2020) Do CEOs affect employees’ political choices? Rev. Financial Stud. 33(4):1781–1817.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bafumi J, Herron MC (2010) Leapfrog representation and extremism: A study of American voters and their members in Congress. Amer. Political Sci. Rev. 104(3):519–542.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barari S (2024) Political speech from Corporate America: Sparse, mostly for Democrats, and somewhat representative. J. Quant. Description: Digital Media 4:1–105.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barber MJ (2016a) Ideological donors, contribution limits, and the polarization of American legislatures. J. Politics 78(1):296–310.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barber MJ (2016b) Representing the preferences of donors, partisans, and voters in the US Senate. Public Opinion Quart. 80(S1):225–249.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barber B IV, Blake D (2023) CEOs and political donations: Are they just like regular people? Acad. Management Proc. 2023(1):11766.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barber B IV, Blake DJ (2024) My kind of people: Political polarization, ideology, and firm location. Strategic Management J. 45(5):849–874.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barber M, Holbein JB (2022) 400 million voting records show profound racial and geographic disparities in voter turnout in the United States. PLoS One 17(6):e0268134.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barber M, Pope JC (2019) Does party trump ideology? Disentangling party and ideology in America. Amer. Political Sci. Rev. 113(1):38–54.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barber M, Canes-Wrone B, Clinton J, Huber G (2025) Donors and dollars: Comparing the policy views of donors and the affluent. J. Politics, ePub ahead of print December 15, https://doi.org/10.1086/736337.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Benton RA, Cobb JA, Werner T (2021) Firm partisan positioning, polarization, and risk communication: Examining voluntary disclosures on COVID-19. Strategic Management J. 43(4):697–723.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bermiss YS, McDonald R (2018) Ideological misfit? Political affiliation and employee departure in the private-equity industry. Acad. Management J. 61(6):2182–2209.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bondi T, Burbano VC, Dell’Acqua F (2025) When (not) to talk politics in business: Experimental evidence. Strategic Management J. 46(5):1105–1119.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bonica A (2014) Mapping the ideological marketplace. Amer. J. Political Sci. 58(2):367–386.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bonica A (2016) Avenues of influence: On the political expenditures of corporations and their directors and executives. Bus. Politics 18(4):367–394.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bonica A, Grumbach JM (2025) Old money: Campaign finance and gerontocracy in the United States. J. Public Econom. 249:105451. Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bonica A, Chilton AS, Sen M (2016) The political ideologies of American lawyers. J. Legal Anal. 8(2):277–335.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bouton L, Cagé J, Dewitte E, Pons V (2024) Small campaign donors. NBER Working Paper No. 30050, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Briscoe F, Joshi A (2017) Bringing the boss’s politics in: Supervisor political ideology and the gender gap in earnings. Acad. Management J. 60(4):1415–1441.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Briscoe F, Chin MK, Hambrick DC (2014) CEO ideology as an element of the corporate opportunity structure for social activists. Acad. Management J. 57(6):1786–1809.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Broockman DE (2016) Approaches to studying policy representation. Legislative Stud. Quart. 41(1):181–215.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Broockman D, Malhotra N (2020) What do partisan donors want? Public Opinion Quart. 84(1):104–118.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brown JR, Enos RD (2021) The measurement of partisan sorting for 180 million voters. Nature Human Behav. 5(8):998–1008.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burbano VC (2021) The demotivating effects of communicating a social-political stance: Field experimental evidence from an online labor market platform. Management Sci. 67(2):1004–1025.Link, Google Scholar
• Busenbark JR, Bundy J, Chin M (2023) Director departure following political ideology (in)congruence with an incoming CEO. Strategic Management J. 44(7):1698–1732.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cantoni E, Pons V (2022) Does context outweigh individual characteristics in driving voting behavior? Evidence from relocations within the United States. Amer. Econom. Rev. 112(4):1226–1272.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Card D (1996) The effect of unions on the structure of wages: A longitudinal analysis. Econometrica 64(4):957–979.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carnahan S, Greenwood BN (2018) Managers’ political beliefs and gender inequality among subordinates: Does his ideology matter more than hers? Admin. Sci. Quart. 63(2):287–322.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carpenter J, Gong E (2015) Motivating agents: How much does the mission matter? J. Labor Econom. 34(1):211–236.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chin MK, Semadeni M (2017) CEO political ideologies and pay egalitarianism within top management teams. Strategic Management J. 38(8):1608–1625.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chin MK, Hambrick DC, Treviño LK (2013) Political ideologies of CEOs: The influence of executives’ values on corporate social responsibility. Admin. Sci. Quart. 58(2):197–232.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chinoy S, Koenen M (2024) Political sorting in the U.S. labor market: Evidence and explanations (December 6), https://sahilchinoy.s3.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/chinoy_politics_work.pdf.Google Scholar
• Christensen DM, Dhaliwal DS, Boivie S, Graffin SD (2015) Top management conservatism and corporate risk strategies: Evidence from managers’ personal political orientation and corporate tax avoidance. Strategic Management J. 36(12):1918–1938.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Christensen DM, Jin H, Sridharan SA, Wellman LA (2022) Hedging on the hill: Does political hedging reduce firm risk? Management Sci. 68(6):4356–4379.Link, Google Scholar
• Clawson D, Neustadtl A, Weller M (1998) Dollars And Votes (Temple University Press, Philadelphia).Google Scholar
• Colonnelli E, Pinho Neto V, Teso E (2022) Politics at work. NBER Working Paper No. 30182, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Converse PE (1964) The nature of belief systems in mass publics. Critical Rev. 18(1–3):1–74.Crossref, Google Scholar
• de Figueiredo JM, Sethi T, Silverman BS (2024) How do inventors’ political preferences affect innovation? Preprint, submitted January 24, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4680642.Google Scholar
• DesJardine MR, Shi W, Werner T (2024) Shareholder activism and the deterrence effect of democratic politician shareholders. Organ. Sci. 36(2):993–1019.Link, Google Scholar
• Dewan Y, Simons T, Wernicke G (2024) The ideological imperative: Corporate social responsibility and news media coverage of firms. Organ. Sci. 35(5):1930–1955.Link, Google Scholar
• Dezső CL, Ross DG (2012) Does female representation in top management improve firm performance? A panel data investigation. Strategic Management J. 33(9):1072–1089.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dias N, Lelkes Y (2022) The nature of affective polarization: Disentangling policy disagreement from partisan identity. Amer. J. Political Sci. 66(3):775–790.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Druckman JN, Levendusky MS (2019) What do we measure when we measure affective polarization? Public Opinion Quart. 83(1):114–122.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ellis C, Stimson JA (2012) Ideology in America (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Enamorado T, Fifield B, Imai K (2019) Using a probabilistic model to assist merging of large-scale administrative records. Amer. Political Sci. Rev. 113(2):353–371.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Evans RB, Prado MP, Rizzo AE, Zambrana R (2024) Identity, diversity, and team performance: Evidence from U.S. mutual funds. Management Sci. 71(4):3026–3051.Link, Google Scholar
• Fellegi IP, Sunter AB (1969) A theory for record linkage. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 64(328):1183–1210.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fewer TJ, Tarakci M (2024) CEO political partisanship and corporate misconduct. Acad. Management J. 68(2):357–379.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Frake J, Hurst R, Kagan M (2024) Partisan segregation in the U.S. workplace is large and rising. Nature Human Behav. Forthcoming. Google Scholar
• Gift K, Gift T (2015) Does politics influence hiring? Evidence from a randomized experiment. Political Behav. 37(3):653–675.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gordon SC, Hafer C, Landa D (2007) Consumption or investment? On motivations for political giving. J. Politics 69(4):1057–1072.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Graffin SD, Hubbard TD, Christensen DM, Lee EY (2020) The influence of CEO risk tolerance on initial pay packages. Strategic Management J. 41(4):788–811.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Green D, Palmquist B, Schickler E (2002) Partisan Hearts and Minds: Political Parties and the Social Identities of Voters (Yale University Press, New Haven, CT).Google Scholar
• Grossmann M, Hopkins DA (2024) Polarized by Degrees: How the Diploma Divide and the Culture War Transformed American Politics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grumbach JM, Sahn A (2020) Race and representation in campaign finance. Amer. Political Sci. Rev. 114(1):206–221.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grumbach JM, Sahn A, Staszak S (2022) Gender, race, and intersectionality in campaign finance. Political Behav. 44(1):319–340.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Guo F (2023) Essays on political economics. PhD thesis, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.Google Scholar
• Gupta A, Briscoe F (2020) Organizational political ideology and corporate openness to social activism. Admin. Sci. Quart. 65(2):524–563.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gupta A, Wowak AJ (2017) The elephant (or donkey) in the boardroom: How board political ideology affects CEO pay. Admin. Sci. Quart. 62(1):1–30.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gupta A, Briscoe F, Hambrick DC (2017) Red, blue, and purple firms: Organizational political ideology and corporate social responsibility. Strategic Management J. 38(5):1018–1040.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gupta A, Briscoe F, Hambrick DC (2018) Evenhandedness in resource allocation: Its relationship with CEO ideology, organizational discretion, and firm performance. Acad. Management J. 61(5):1848–1868.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gupta A, Fung A, Murphy C (2021) Out of character: CEO political ideology, peer influence, and adoption of CSR executive position by Fortune 500 firms. Strategic Management J. 42(3):529–557.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gupta A, Nadkarni S, Mariam M (2019) Dispositional sources of managerial discretion: CEO ideology, CEO personality, and firm strategies. Admin. Sci. Quart. 64(4):855–893.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gupta A, Wowak AJ, Boeker W (2022) Corporate directors as heterogeneous network pipes: How director political ideology affects the interorganizational diffusion of governance practices. Strategic Management J. 43(8):1469–1498.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hersh ED (2015) Hacking the Electorate: How Campaigns Perceive Voters (Cambridge University Press, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hertel-Fernandez A (2017) American employers as political machines. J. Politics 79(1):105–117.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hertel-Fernandez A (2018) Politics at Work: How Companies Turn Their Workers into Lobbyists (Oxford University Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Hoogendoorn S, Oosterbeek H, van Praag M (2013) The impact of gender diversity on the performance of business teams: Evidence from a field experiment. Management Sci. 59(7):1514–1528.Link, Google Scholar
• Huang D, Lei L, Wang M, Xing Y (2024) Managerial overextrapolation: Who and when. Management Sci. 71(6):5328–5350.Link, Google Scholar
• Hurst R (2023) Countervailing claims: Pro-diversity responses to stigma by association following the Unite the Right Rally. Admin. Sci. Quart. 68(4):1094–1132.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hurst R, Lee SR (2025) Sociopolitical stance-taking and labor market sorting: Evidence from experiments. Preprint, submitted November 18, http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4846170.Google Scholar
• Hutton I, Jiang D, Kumar A (2015) Political values, culture, and corporate litigation. Management Sci. 61(12):2905–2925.Link, Google Scholar
• Hwang KJ, Phillips DJ (2024) Entrepreneurship as a response to labor market discrimination for formerly incarcerated people. Amer. J. Sociol. 130(1):88–146.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Igielnik R, Keeter S, Kennedy C, Spahn B (2018) Commercial voter files and the study of U.S. politics: Demystifying the digital databases widely used by political campaigns. Pew Res. Center (February 15), https://www.pewresearch.org/methods/2018/02/15/commercial-voter-files-and-the-study-of-u-s-politics/.Google Scholar
• Imai K, Olivella S, Rosenman ETR (2022) Addressing census data problems in race imputation via fully Bayesian Improved Surname Geocoding and name supplements. Sci. Adv. 8(49):eadc9824.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Iyengar S, Sood G, Lelkes Y (2012) Affect, not ideology: A social identity perspective on polarization. Public Opinion Quart. 76(3):405–431.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jost JT (2006) The end of the end of ideology. Amer. Psych. 61(7):651–670.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kalla JL, Broockman DE (2016) Campaign contributions facilitate access to congressional officials: A randomized field experiment. Amer. J. Political Sci. 60(3):545–558.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kalmoe NP (2020) Uses and abuses of ideology in political psychology. Political Psych. 41(4):771–793.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Karpowitz CF, O’Connell SD, Preece J, Stoddard O (2024) Strength in numbers? Gender composition, leadership, and women’s influence in teams. J. Politics Econom. 132(9):3077–3114.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Keith BE, Magleby DB, Nelson CJ, Orr EA, Westlye MC (1992) The Myth of the Independent Voter (University of California Press, Berkeley, CA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kempf E, Tsoutsoura M (2021) Partisan professionals: Evidence from credit rating analysts. J. Finance 76(6):2805–2856.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Keum DD, Meier S (2024) License to layoff? Unemployment insurance and the moral cost of layoffs. Organ. Sci. 35(3):994–1014.Link, Google Scholar
• Kim W (2025) Political polarization in medicine. Working Paper No. 4275, Stanford Graduate School of Business, Stanford, CA.Google Scholar
• Kim IS, Stuckatz J, Wolters L (2026) Systemic and sequential links between campaign donations and lobbying. J. Politics 88(1):110–124.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kinder DR, Kalmoe NP (2017) Neither Liberal Nor Conservative: Ideological Innocence in the American Public, Chicago Studies in American Politics (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Klar S (2014) Identity and engagement among political independents in America. Political Psych. 35(4):577–591.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Klar S, Krupnikov Y (2016) Independent Politics: How American Disdain for Parties Leads to Political Inaction (Cambridge University Press, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kovács B, Sels T (2025) Political alignment in entrepreneurial teams: Homophily in venture formation and associations with startup success. Strategic Management. Forthcoming.Google Scholar
• Kramer S, Passel JS (2025) What the data says about immigrants in the U.S. Pew Res. Center (August 21), https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2025/08/21/key-findings-about-us-immigrants/.Google Scholar
• Larcker DF, Miles SA, Tayan B (2018) The double-edged sword of CEO activism. Rock Center for Corporate Governance at Stanford University Closer Look Series: Topics, Issues and Controversies in Corporate Governance No. CGRP-74 2018 (Stanford, CA), 12.Google Scholar
• Lenz GS (2012) Follow the Leader?: How Voters Respond to Politicians’ Policies and Performance, Chicago Studies in American Politics (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Li Z (2018) How internal constraints shape interest group activities: Evidence from access-seeking PACs. Amer. Political Sci. Rev. 112(4):792–808.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Li Z, Disalvo RW (2023) Can stakeholders mobilize businesses for the protection of democracy? Evidence from the U.S. Capitol insurrection. Amer. Political Sci. Rev. 117(3):1130–1136.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Li Q, Lourie B, Nekrasov A, Shevlin T (2022) Employee turnover and firm performance: Large-sample archival evidence. Management Sci. 68(8):5667–5683.Link, Google Scholar
• Linacre R, Lindsay S, Manassis T, Slade Z, Hepworth T, Kennedy R, Bond A (2022) Splink: Free software for probabilistic record linkage at scale. Internat. J. Population Data Sci. 7(3):23.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lungeanu R, Weber K (2021) Social responsibility beyond the corporate: Executive mental accounting across sectoral and issue domains. Organ. Sci. 32(6):1473–1491.Link, Google Scholar
• Mannor MJ, Busenbark JR (2025) A donation-based indicator of political ideology (dipi): An open dataset for studying the political ideologies of employees, top management teams, ceos, boards, and industries. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 188:104419.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mason L (2018) Uncivil Agreement: How Politics Became Our Identity (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).Crossref, Google Scholar
• McDonnell M-H, Cobb JA (2020) Take a stand or keep your seat: Board turnover after social movement boycotts. Acad. Management J. 63(4):1028–1053.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McDonnell M-H, Werner T (2016) Blacklisted businesses: Social activists’ challenges and the disruption of corporate political activity. Admin. Sci. Quart. 61(4):584–620.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McKean AE, King BG (2024) When ideologies align: Progressive corporate activism and within-firm ideological alignment. Strategic Management J. 45(12):2459–2518.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Meisels M, Clinton JD, Huber GA (2024) Giving to the extreme? Experimental evidence on donor response to candidate and district characteristics. British J. Political Sci. 54(3):851–873.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Minefee I, McDonnell M-H, Werner T (2021) Reexamining investor reaction to covert corporate political activity: A replication and extension of Werner (2017). Strategic Management J. 42(6):1139–1158.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mkrtchyan A, Sandvik J, Zhu VZ (2024) CEO activism and firm value. Management Sci. 70(10):6519–6549.Link, Google Scholar
• Mohliver A, Raines G (2024) How social upheaval shaped DEI hiring practices: Evidence from over 21 million job postings and hires. Preprint, submitted September 6, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4923070.Google Scholar
• Mohliver A, Crilly D, Kaul A (2023) Corporate social counterpositioning: How attributes of social issues influence competitive response. Strategic Management J. 44(5):1199–1217.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mutz DC, Mondak JJ (2006) The workplace as a context for cross-cutting political discourse. J. Politics 68(1):140–155.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ornstein JT (2024) Probabilistic Record Linkage Using Pretrained Text Embeddings (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK), 1–12. Google Scholar
• Park UD, Boeker W, Gomulya D (2020) Political ideology of the board and CEO dismissal following financial misconduct. Strategic Management J. 41(1):108–123.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Petrenko OV, Aime F, Ridge J, Hill A (2016) Corporate social responsibility or CEO narcissism? CSR motivations and organizational performance. Strategic Management J. 37(2):262–279.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Petrocik JR (2009) Measuring party support: Leaners are not independents. Electoral Stud. 28(4):562–572.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Poole KT (1998) Recovering a basic space from a set of issue scales. Amer. J. Political Sci. 42(3):954–993.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Raffiee J, Teodoridis F, Fehder D (2023) Partisan patent examiners? Exploring the link between the political ideology of patent examiners and patent office outcomes. Res. Policy 52(9):104853.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Richard OC (2000) Racial diversity, business strategy, and firm performance: A resource-based view. Acad. Management J. 43(2):164–177.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Richter BK, Werner T (2017) Campaign contributions from corporate executives in lieu of political action committees. J. Law Econom. Organ. 33(3):443–474.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Roth PL, Arnold JD, Walker HJ, Zhang L, Van Iddekinge CH (2022) Organizational political affiliation and job seekers: If I don’t identify with your party, am I still attracted? J. Appl. Psych. 107(5):724–745.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schaffner B, Ansolabehere S, Shih M (2023) Cooperative election study. Accessed October 29, 2023, https://cces.gov.harvard.edu.Google Scholar
• Semadeni M, Chin MK, Krause R (2022) Pumping the brakes: Examining the impact of CEO political ideology divergence on firm responses. Acad. Management J. 65(2):516–544.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Seo H (2024) Counter-activism against ideological opponents: Evidence based on the competitive dynamics of corporate engagement in advocacy giving. Organ. Sci. 36(4):1333–1356.Link, Google Scholar
• Shanor A, McDonnell M-H, Werner T (2022) Corporate political power: The politics of reputation & traceability. Emory Law J. 71:153–216.Google Scholar
• Shi W, Gao C, Aguilera RV (2021) The liabilities of foreign institutional ownership: Managing political dependence through corporate political spending. Strategic Management J. 42(1):84–113.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shi W, Xia C, Meyer-Doyle P (2022) Institutional investor activism and employee safety: The role of activist and board political ideology. Organ. Sci. 33(6):2404–2420.Link, Google Scholar
• Shi W, Connelly BL, Mackey JD, Gupta A (2019) Placing their bets: The influence of strategic investment on CEO pay-for-performance. Strategic Management J. 40(12):2047–2077.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Spenkuch JL, Teso E, Xu G (2023) Ideology and performance in public organizations. Econometrica 91(4):1171–1203.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Steel R (2026) Partisan bias in securities enforcement. J. Law Econom. Organ. 42(1):34–60.Google Scholar
• Stuckatz J (2022a) How the workplace affects employee political contributions. Amer. Political Sci. Rev. 116(1):54–69.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stuckatz J (2022b) Political alignment between firms and employees in the United States: Evidence from a new dataset. Political Sci. Res. Methods 10(1):215–225.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Swigart KL, Anantharaman A, Williamson JA, Grandey AA (2020) Working while liberal/conservative: A review of political ideology in organizations. J. Management 46(6):1063–1091.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Teso E (2025) Influence-seeking in U.S. corporate elites’ campaign contribution behavior. Rev. Econom. Statist. 107(3):685–696.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tilcsik A, Anteby M, Knight CR (2015) Concealable stigma and occupational segregation: Toward a theory of gay and lesbian occupations. Admin. Sci. Quart. 60(3):446–481.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Uggen C, Larson R, Shannon S, Stewart R (2022) Locked out 2022: Estimates of people denied voting rights. The Sentencing Project, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
• Van Assche J, Swart H, Schmid K, Dhont K, Al Ramiah A, Christ O, Kauff M, et al. (2023) Intergroup contact is reliably associated with reduced prejudice, even in the face of group threat and discrimination. Amer. Psych. 78(6):761–774.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Verba S, Schlozman KL, Brady HE (1995) Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vogels EA, Auxier B, Anderson M (2021) Partisan differences in social media use show up for some platforms, but not Facebook. Pew Res. Center (April 7), https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2021/04/07/partisan-differences-in-social-media-use-show-up-for-some-platforms-but-not-facebook/.Google Scholar
• Werner T (2015) Gaining access by doing good: The effect of sociopolitical reputation on firm participation in public policy making. Management Sci. 61(8):1989–2011.Link, Google Scholar
• White J, Hurst R, Kagan M (2025) Corporate political stances and employee turnover. Preprint, submitted January 24, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5104450.Google Scholar
• Wowak AJ, Busenbark JR (2024) Why do some conservative CEOs publicly support liberal causes? Organizational ideology, managerial discretion, and CEO sociopolitical activism. Organ. Sci. 35(4):1388–1408.Link, Google Scholar
• Wowak AJ, Busenbark JR, Hambrick DC (2022) How do employees react when their CEO speaks out? Intra- and extra-firm implications of CEO sociopolitical activism. Admin. Sci. Quart. 67(2):553–593.Crossref, Google Scholar