We spend how much? Misperceptions, innumeracy, and support for the foreign aid in the United States and Great Britain
Open accessAbstract
Majorities of citizens in high-income countries often oppose foreign aid spending. One popular explanation is that the public overestimates the percentage and amount of taxpayer funds that goes toward overseas aid. Does expressing aid flows in dollar and/or percentage terms shift public opinion toward aid? We report the results of an experiment examining differences in support for aid spending as a function of the information American and British respondents receive about foreign aid spending. In both nations, providing respondents with information about foreign aid spending as a percentage of the national budget significantly reduces support for cuts. The findings suggest that support for aid can be increased, but significant opposition to aid spending remains.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Two studies revealed that Americans increased their support for foreign aid spending when they were informed about the share of the federal budget spent on foreign aid.
“two studies revealed that Americans increased their support for foreign aid spending when they were informed about the share of the federal budget spent on foreign aid (Gilens, 2001;Scotto et al., 2017).”
From Factual belief polarization between Democrats and Republicans: source or epiphenomenon of ideological and affective polarization? (2024) · cites this paper as Scotto et al., 2017
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
When Corrections Fail: The Persistence of Political Misperceptions
Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2010) · Political Behavior · doi:10.1007/s11109-010-9112-2 · Cited by 3,173 · see citing works
Self-citationMisinformation and the Currency of Democratic Citizenship
Kuklinski, J. H., Quirk, P. J., Jerit, J., Schwieder, D., & Rich, R. F. (2000) · The Journal of Politics · doi:10.1111/0022-3816.00033 · Cited by 1,167 · see citing works
Framing Public Opinion in Competitive Democracies
Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055407070554 · Cited by 1,127 · see citing works
Gigerenzer, G. (2008) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1745-6916.2008.00058.x · Cited by 962 · see citing works
Motivated numeracy and enlightened self-government
KAHAN, D. M., PETERS, E., DAWSON, E. C., & SLOVIC, P. (2017) · Behavioural Public Policy · doi:10.1017/bpp.2016.2 · Cited by 883 · cited 1× · see citing works
“In addition, Kahan et al. (2013) show that innumeracy can itself be a function of directionally motivated reasoning.”
BackgroundSimple tools for understanding risks: from innumeracy to insight
Gigerenzer, G., & Edwards, A. (2003) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7417.741 · Cited by 770 · see citing works
Political ignorance and collective policy preferences
Gilens, M. (2001) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055401002222 · Cited by 764 · see citing works
Immigration and the Imagined Community in Europe and the United States
Citrin, J., & Sides, J. (2008) · Political Studies · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9248.2007.00716.x · Cited by 384 · see citing works
Peters, E. M. (2012) · Current Directions in Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0963721411429960 · Cited by 369 · see citing works
Alba, R., Rumbaut, R. G., & Marotz, K. G. (2005) · Social Forces · doi:10.1353/sof.2006.0002 · Cited by 367 · see citing works
Motivated Numeracy and Enlightened Self-GovernmentPreprint
Kahan, D. M., Peters, E. M., Dawson, E., et al. (2013) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2319992 · Cited by 307 · see citing works
Individual and country-level factors affecting support for foreign aid
Paxton, P. M., & Knack, S. (2011) · International Political Science Review · doi:10.1177/0192512111406095 · Cited by 199 · see citing works
The consequences of political innumeracy
Lawrence, E. D., & Sides, J. (2014) · Research & Politics · doi:10.1177/2053168014545414 · Cited by 130 · see citing works
Partners in Development: Report of the Commission on International Development
von der Mehden, F. R., & Pearson, L. B. (1970) · The Western Political Quarterly · doi:10.2307/446556 · Cited by 114 · see citing works
Race, Paternalism, and Foreign Aid: Evidence from U.S. Public Opinion
Baker, A. (2015) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055414000549 · Cited by 102 · see citing works
Hudson, J. V.-H., & Hudson, D. (2009) · Political Studies · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9248.2009.00800.x · Cited by 65 · see citing works
Self-citation'A Mile Wide and an Inch Deep': Surveys of Public Attitudes towards Development Aid
Hudson, D., & Hudson, J. V.-H. (2012) · International Journal of Development Education and Global Learning · doi:10.18546/ijdegl.04.1.02 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Self-citation“A Mile Wide and an Inch Deep”? Understanding Public Support for Aid: The Case of the United Kingdom
Henson, S., & Lindström, J. (2012) · World Development · doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2012.07.004 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
Partners in Development: Report of the Commission on International Development
Hainsworth, G. B. (1970) · Pacific Affairs · doi:10.2307/2754224 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
Numeracy and the Persuasive Effect of Policy Information and Party Cues
Mérola, V., & Hitt, M. P. (2015) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1093/poq/nfv051 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Bader, M., & Schmeets, H. (2014) · Research & Politics · doi:10.1177/2053168014541587 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
Aid Under Pressure: Support for Development Assistance in a Global Economic Downturn
vanHeerde, J., & Hudson, D. J. (2009) · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Self-citationStatistical Illiteracy in Residents: What They Do Not Learn Today Will Hurt Their Patients Tomorrow
Wegwarth, O. (2013) · Journal of Graduate Medical Education · doi:10.4300/jgme-d-13-00084.1 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Rekker, R., & Harteveld, E. (2024) · Acta Politica · doi:10.1057/s41269-022-00265-4 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Rekker, R. (2024) · Frontiers in Political Science · doi:10.3389/fpos.2024.1254826 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
- Authors
- Scotto, T. J., Reifler, J., Hudson, D., & vanHeerde-Hudson, J.
- Affiliations
- University of Strathclyde (GB)
- University of Exeter (GB)
- University of Birmingham (GB)
- Venue
- Journal of Experimental Political Science
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2017
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 119-128
- ISSN
- 2052-2630 (ISSN-L)
- 2052-2649
- OpenAlex
- W2754343868
- Cited by
- 52
- References
- 23
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 3
- FWCI
- 35.46
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Experimental Political Science (publishedVersion)
- ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (acceptedVersion)
- ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (acceptedVersion)
- Open Research Exeter (University of Exeter) (acceptedVersion)
- University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Strathprints: The University of Strathclyde institutional repository (University of Strathclyde) (submittedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- Figshare (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Economic and Social Research Council (ES/H010246/1)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Development › International Development and Aid
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › International Relations and Foreign Policy
- Keywords
- foreign aid, public opinion, aid spending, misunderstanding, innumeracy, aid cuts, United States, Great Britain, comparative public opinion
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
