CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,468Electoral Systems and Political ParticipationMedia Influence and PoliticsPolitical Theory and Democracy

Beyond the Running Tally: Partisan Bias in Political Perceptions

Bartels, Larry M.·2002·Political Behavior
DOI 10.1023/a:1021226224601
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1023/a:1021226224601

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Political scientists have found that partisan bias effects on question-answering accuracy are significantly reduced when respondents are offered a monetary bonus for correct answers.

    “Political scientists have found that partisan bias effects on questionanswering accuracy [Bartels, 2002] are significantly reduced when respondents are offered a monetary bonus for correct answers [Bullock et al., 2015, Prior et al., 2015].”

    From Talk Isn't Always Cheap: Understanding Failure Modes in Multi-Agent Debate (2025) · cites this paper as Bartels, 2002

  • People tend to believe that economic outcomes are more favorable when their party is in the White House and more unfavorable when it is out.

    “A seminal finding in political behavior research is that people tend to believe that economic outcomes (e.g., GDP growth, unemployment rate) are more favorable when their party is in the White House and more unfavorable when it is out (Bartels 2002).”

    From The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States (2019) · cites this paper as Bartels 2002

  • Partisan divides over politically-relevant facts exist on topics ranging from economic performance to health care policy.

    “A number of studies find that partisans disagree about politically-relevant facts on topics ranging from the performance of the economy (e.g., Bartels, 2002;Scha↵ner and Roche, 2017;Bisgaard and Slothuus, 2018) to the details of health care policy (e.g., Berinsky, 2017;Nyhan, 2010).”

    From Partisan Gaps in Political Information and Information-Seeking Behavior: Motivated Reasoning or Cheerleading? (2019) · cites this paper as Bartels, 2002

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

4 of the 44 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Bartels, L. M.
Affiliations
Princeton University (US)
Corresponding author
Bartels, Larry M.
ORCID
Bartels, Larry M.
Venue
Political Behavior
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2002-06
Volume
24
Issue
2
Pages
117-150
ISSN
  • 0190-9320 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-6687
DOI
10.1023/a:1021226224601
OpenAlex
W178177854
Cited by
1,468
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 72 · 2025: 96 · 2024: 84 · 2023: 67 · 2022: 75 · 2021: 106 · 2020: 128 · 2019: 94 · 2018: 106 · 2017: 91 · 2016: 80 · 2015: 75 · 2014: 82 · 2013: 67 · 2012: 56
FWCI
58.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
Political Behavior (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Media Influence and Politics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Theory and Democracy
Keywords
partisan bias, party identification, partisan loyalty, political perception, opinion change, partisan polarization, Democrats and Republicans, political attitudes

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