About

Brian J Gaines is the Honorable W. Russell Arrington Professor in State Politics for the University of Illinois system, and a professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. His research primarily deals with elections, electoral rules, and public opinion. Gaines has contributed to the field through various publications, including articles on public health policy framing, survey design, causal mediation analysis, and the influence of motivation on political decision-making. He has also served as an editor for the Political Methodologist and American Politics Research, and has been involved in providing expert commentary on political and electoral issues. Gaines holds a BA with honours from the University of British Columbia and AM and PhD degrees from Stanford University.

Research topics

• Computer Science
• Political Science
• Computer Security
• Mathematics
• Artificial Intelligence
• Statistics
• Microeconomics
• Internal medicine
• Econometrics
• Economics
• Psychology
• Medicine
• Social psychology
• Mathematical optimization
• Virology

Selected publications

• Partisan Division On Ranked-Choice Voting

  SSRN Electronic Journal · 2026-01-01

  preprintOpen access1st authorCorresponding
  PublisherDOI

• Life-or-Death Framing of Public-Health Policy in a Pandemic

  Journal of Experimental Political Science · 2025-05-21

  articleOpen access1st authorCorresponding

  Abstract The justifiably famous “Asian disease” experiment (ADE) by Tversky and Kahneman established that choices involving uncertainty can be dependent on framing. Description emphasizing gains induced much higher preference for choices in which outcomes were described as certain rather than probabilistic, as compared to description emphasizing losses. The vignette for the ADE involved disease mitigation, and the COVID pandemic gave it much-enhanced realism and immediacy. An attempt to replicate the ADE during the pandemic, however, failed to produce the original results. Other, contemporaneous replications, by contrast, matched the original, leaving open the question of when such framing effects occur.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• Eviction Expectations in the Aftermath of the Pandemic Moratoria

  SSRN Electronic Journal · 2023-01-01

  articleOpen access1st authorCorresponding
  PublisherDOI

• Race and Eviction During the Pandemic

  SSRN Electronic Journal · 2022-01-01

  articleOpen access1st authorCorresponding
  PublisherDOI

• The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on State Court Proceedings: Five Key Findings

  SSRN Electronic Journal · 2022 · 2 citations

  • Political Science
  • Political Science
  • Computer Science
  PublisherDOI

• Policy Spotlight: Ongoing Expert Advice on Pandemic Policies

  SSRN Electronic Journal · 2021-01-01

  articleOpen access1st authorCorresponding
  PublisherDOI

• Public Opinion and Political Viability of Budget Tools

  Figshare · 2021-01-01

  articleOpen access1st authorCorresponding

  What are the political prospects of various plans to boost revenue or reduce spending? One way to answer is via opinion polls. Few say they support broad tax increases or spending cuts on education or Medicaid. Targeted taxes on the wealthy and reductions in benefits to state employees, by contrast, generate positive reactions. However, caution is always in order with polls. Some opinions seem open to change. For instance, support for raising taxes on the rich falls when people are told what rates they currently pay, on average. Support for cutting spending on schools can rise when people are informed of present spending levels. Unfamiliar proposals often generate negative reactions or partisan reactions if they are perceived as coming from only one party. Generally, the public understands that Illinois is in bad shape, but many skeptical about solutions and tired of hearing endless discussion of “crises.” <br><br> <br> <br>

  OA PDFDOI

• Pandemic Stress Indicator: Expert Panel

  SSRN Electronic Journal · 2021-01-01

  articleOpen access1st authorCorresponding
  PublisherDOI

• How Will Illinois’ Push for Mail-In Balloting Affect Voter Confidence in the November 2020 Election?

  Figshare · 2021-01-01

  articleOpen access

  The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in most states making numerous changes to electoral procedures, in an effort to assist those voters wishing to avoid crowded polling places, and the health risks they pose. Illinois, like most others, will permit in-person voting, both on Election Day and in advance, but will also encourage voters to take advantage of mail-in voting. Survey data from recent years reveal that many voters, not without cause, worry slightly more about absentee or mail ballots not being counted, and may believe that fraud is more likely when voting is remote. To boost confidence in the integrity of the 2020 election, accordingly, we recommend that Illinois officials publicize details of the new rules, caution about some likely consequences, including delayed final results, and strive to ensure uniform application of rules. Generally, any important change in voting procedures should be accompanied by some public-service education campaign. With many changes being made, on a temporary, emergency basis, election officials and the voting public alike will face unusual challenges, and could require more help than usual from the state

  OA PDFDOI

• Survey Design, Order Effects, and Causal Mediation Analysis

  The Journal of Politics · 2021 · 43 citations

  • Computer Science
  • Political Science
  • Psychology

  Causal mediation analysis requires measurement of an outcome variable (O) with and without treatment, plus a set of mediator variables (M) that constitute possible pathways for the treatment effect. There is no consensus on whether surveys should measure potentially mediating variables before or after the outcome variables—MO or OM. We use a replication exercise to demonstrate how the order of mediator and outcome items can be consequential for the results from causal mediation analysis. Order can affect mediation conclusions, even if the treatment effect is similar across designs. As such, randomizing order is usually prudent, although best practice depends on the researcher’s contextual knowledge about her particular application.

  PublisherDOI

Frequent coauthors

• Wendy K. Tam Cho

  University of California, San Francisco

  10 shared

• Gisela Sin

  University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign

  7 shared

• James H. Kuklinski

  7 shared

• Robin Wilson

  6 shared

• Jason Mazzone

  5 shared

• Stephen Bates

  5 shared

• Mark Goodwin

  5 shared

• Brian R. Sala

  University of California, Davis

  4 shared

Awards & honors

• Honorable W. Russell Arrington Professor in State Politics