Partisan Elites as Culprits? How Party Cues Shape Partisan Perceptual Gaps
Abstract
Partisanship often colors how citizens perceive real‐world conditions. For example, an oft‐documented finding is that citizens tend to view the state of the national economy more positively if their party holds office. These partisan perceptual gaps are usually taken as a result of citizens' own motivated reasoning to defend their party identity. However, little is known about the extent to which perceptual gaps are shaped by one of the most important forces in politics: partisan elites. With two studies focusing on perceptions of the economy—a quasi‐experimental panel study and a randomized experiment—we show how partisan perceptual differences are substantially affected by messages coming from party elites. These findings imply that partisan elites are more influential on, and more responsible for, partisan perceptual differences than previous studies have revealed.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
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 Bisgaard and Slothuus, 2018
Cites
The case for motivated reasoning.
Kunda, Z. (1990) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.108.3.480 · Cited by 9,022 · see citing works
The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion
Zaller, J. R. (1992) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511818691 · Cited by 7,785 · see citing works
Beyond the Running Tally: Partisan Bias in Political Perceptions
Bartels, L. M. (2002) · Political Behavior · doi:10.1023/a:1021226224601 · Cited by 1,468 · see citing works
Elite Influence on Public Opinion in an Informed Electorate
BULLOCK, J. G. (2011) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055411000165 · Cited by 777 · see citing works
The Impact of No Child Left Behind on Student Achievement
Dee, T. S., & Jacob, B. (2011) · Journal of Policy Analysis and Management · doi:10.1002/pam.20586 · Cited by 487 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Out-group animosity drives engagement on social media
Rathje, S., Van Bavel, J. J., & van der Linden, S. (2021) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2024292118 · Cited by 560 · see citing works
Peterson, E., & Iyengar, S. (2019) · doi:10.31235/osf.io/pmn7h · Cited by 241 · see citing works
Causal Panel Analysis under Parallel Trends: Lessons from a Large Reanalysis Study
CHIU, A., LAN, X., LIU, Z., & XU, Y. (2026) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055425000243 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Political surveys bias self‐reported economic perceptions
Bailey, J. (2022) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1093/poq/nfab054 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
- Authors
- Bisgaard, M., & Slothuus, R.
- Affiliations
- Aarhus University (DK)
- Venue
- American Journal of Political Science
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2018-03-25
- Volume
- 62
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 456-469
- ISSN
- 0092-5853 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-5907
- OpenAlex
- W2793769902
- Cited by
- 269
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 27 · 2025: 48 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 58 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1
- FWCI
- 81.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- American Journal of Political Science (publishedVersion)
- Scopus (Elsevier) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Det Frie Forskningsråd (11‐104605, DFF‐4003‐00192B)
- 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 › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Keywords
- party cues, economic perceptions, motivated reasoning, partisan identity, 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