What makes social policy programs (un)popular? Disentangling the causal impact of policy design, risk group deservingness and and mode of delivery. Journal of European Social Policy.
It’s the middle that matters? Income group coalitions in support for redistributive welfare reform. International Journal of Social Welfare.
Policy feedback and income targeting in the welfare state. Journal of Social Policy.
Basic Income in Belgium survey: experimental data on citizens’ attitudes towards a variety of basic income policies. Data in Brief.
Wie steunt welk type basisinkomen? Een analyse op basis van de ‘Basisinkomen in Nederland’ survey. Tilburg University: Departement Sociologie.
New Horizons in Welfare Attitudes Research. A Research Agenda for Public Attitudes to Welfare. Edward Elgar Publishing.
The multidimensionality of public support for basic income: A vignette experiment in Belgium. Journal of European Public Policy.
Leading Social Policy Analysis from the Front. Essays in Honour of Wim van Oorschot. Leuven: Centre for Sociological Research, KU Leuven.
Are universal welfare policies really more popular than selective ones? A critical discussion of empirical research. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy.
How to Study Welfare State Legitimacy. An Analytical Model Inspired by the Work of Wim van Oorschot. In: T. Laenen et al., (Eds.). Leading Social Policy Analysis from the Front. Essays in Honour of Wim van Oorschot. Leuven: Centre for Sociological Research, KU Leuven.
Two decades after Korpi & Palme’s “paradox of redistribution”: What have we learnt so far and where do we take it from here? Journal of International and Comparative Social Policy.
Welfare State Legitimacy in Times of Crisis and Austerity: Between Continuity and Change. Edward Elgar Publishing.
The Social Legitimacy of Basic Income: A Cross-National and Multidimensional Perspective. Special Issue in the Journal of International and Comparative Social Policy, 36(3), 217-222.
How Popular Deservingness Perceptions Mediate the Link Between Unemployment Policies and their Public Support. In Laenen, T., et al. (Eds.), Welfare State Legitimacy in Times of Crisis and Austerity: Between Continuity and Change. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
An unconditional basic income? How Dutch citizens justify their opinions about a basic income and work conditionality. Journal of International and Comparative Social Policy, 36(3), 284-300.
Welfare Deservingness and Welfare Policy. Popular Deservingness Opinions and their Interaction with Welfare State Policies. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Twenty years after Korpi and Palme’s “paradox of redistribution”: what have we learned so far and where should we take it from here? SPSW Working Paper Series, No. CESO/SPSW/2019-01. Leuven: Centre for Sociological Research.
Why deservingness theory needs qualitative research: Comparing focus group discussions on social welfare in three welfare regimes. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 60(3), 190-216.
Public support for the social rights and social obligations of the unemployed: two sides of the same coin? International Journal of Social Welfare, 28(4), 454-467.
The Past, Present and Future of European Welfare Attitudes: Topline Results from Round 8 of the European Social Survey. ESS Topline Series, No. 8. London: ESS ERIC.
Retrenchment of unemployment protection and the absence of public resistance in Denmark and the Netherlands. The role of popular deservingness perceptions among welfare constituents. CCWS Working Papers, no 2018-93. Aalborg: Centre for Comparative Welfare Studies.
Do institutions matter? The interplay between income benefit design, popular perceptions, and the social legitimacy of targeted welfare. Journal of European Social Policy, 28(1), 4-17.
A Universal Rank Order of Deservingness? Geographical, Temporal and Social-Structural Comparisons. In W. van Oorschot et al. (Eds.), The Social Legitimacy of Targeted Welfare: Attitudes to Welfare Deservingness. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
De Vlaming over zijn sociale zekerheid: voor wat, hoort wat? Analyse op basis van het postelectoraal verkiezingsonderzoek 2014. Leuven: Centrum voor Sociologisch Onderzoek.