The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Partisanship, Political Control, and Economic Assessments
Abstract
Previous research shows that partisans rate the economy more favorably when their party holds power. There are several explanations for this association, including use of different evaluative criteria, selective perception, selective exposure to information, correlations between economic experiences and partisanship, and partisan bias in survey responses. We use a panel survey around the November 2006 election to measure changes in economic expectations and behavioral intentions after an unanticipated shift in political power. Using this design, we can observe whether the association between partisanship and economic assessments holds when some leading mechanisms thought to bring it about are excluded. We find that there are large and statistically significant partisan differences in how economic assessments and behavioral intentions are revised immediately following the Democratic takeover of Congress. We conclude that this pattern of partisan response suggests partisan differences in perceptions of the economic competence of the parties, rather than alternative mechanisms.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
When party control of Congress switches, consumer behavior changes along party lines in anticipation of changes in the economy.
“Gerber & Huber (2010) find that when party control of Congress switches, consumer behavior changes, and it changes along party lines, in anticipation of changes in the economy.”
From The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States (2019) · cites this paper as Gerber & Huber (2010)
After Democrats took over Congress in 2006, strong Democrats showed a 12.8% increase in holiday spending and a 30.5% increase in vacation spending relative to strong Republicans.
“After the Democrats took over Congress in 2006, strong Democrats showed a 12.8% increase in holiday spending and a 30.5% increase in vacation spending relative to strong Republicans.”
From The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States (2019) · cites this paper as Gerber & Huber (2010)
Citations
Cites
Beyond the Running Tally: Partisan Bias in Political Perceptions
Bartels, L. M. (2002) · Political Behavior · doi:10.1023/a:1021226224601 · Cited by 1,468
A Framework for the Study of Personality and Political Behaviour
MONDAK, J. J., & HALPERIN, K. D. (2008) · British Journal of Political Science · doi:10.1017/s0007123408000173 · Cited by 645
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 35
- 10.2202/1540-8884.1129 · DOI
- 10.1086/229744 · DOI
- 10.2307/2669291 · DOI · Paper page
- Bartels Larry, 2006, Capturing Campaign Effects, 78
- Campbell Angus, 1960, The American Voter
- 10.2307/448017 · DOI
- 10.2307/2131168 · DOI
- 10.2307/2111283 · DOI
- Converse Philip E., 1964, Ideology and Discontent, 206
- 10.1111/j.0092-5853.2004.00092.x · DOI
- 10.2307/2669272 · DOI
- 10.2307/2586311 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1468-2508.2006.00380.x · DOI
- 10.2307/2110623 · DOI
- Fiorina Morris P., 1981, Retrospective Voting in American National Elections.
- 10.1146/annurev.polisci.2.1.189 · DOI
- 10.1017/S0003055409990098 · DOI · Paper page
- Gerber Alan Gregory A.Huber andEbonyaWashington.2009. “Party Affiliation Partisanship and Political Beliefs: A Field Experiment.” National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper No. 15365.http://papers.nber.org/papers/w15365(accessed September 2009). · DOI
- Green Donald, 2002, Partisan Hearts and Minds: Political Parties and the Social Identities of Voters
- Keith Bruce E., 1992, The Myth of the Independent Voter, 10.1525/9780520912236 · DOI
- 10.2307/2669316 · DOI · Paper page
- Ladd Jonathan andGabrielLenz.2008. “Exploiting a Rare Shift in Communication Flows to Test for Media Persuasion: The 1998 British Election.” Typescript Massachusetts Institute of Technology . · DOI
- 10.1177/0010414005285758 · DOI
- Larcinese Valentino RiccardoPuglisi andJames M.Snyder Jr.2007. “Partisan Bias in Economic News: Evidence on the Agenda‐Setting Behavior of U.S. Newspapers.” NBER Working Paper No. 13378. · DOI
- 10.3998/mpub.92266 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2007.00300.x · DOI
- 10.2307/1958271 · DOI
- 10.1037/0022-3514.37.11.2098 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1093/oxfordjournals.pan.a004865 · DOI
- 10.2307/2111381 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00389.x · DOI
- 10.2307/2111016 · DOI
- Wattenberg Martin P., 1998, The Decline of American Political Parties, 1952–1996
- 10.1093/pan/5.1.181 · DOI
- 10.1023/A:1024841605168 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States
Iyengar, S., Lelkes, Y., Levendusky, M., Malhotra, N., & Westwood, S. J. (2019) · Annual Review of Political Science · doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-051117-073034 · Cited by 3,317
Scientific communication in a post-truth society
Iyengar, S., & Massey, D. S. (2019) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1805868115 · Cited by 374
Political Psychology in the Digital (mis)Information age: A Model of News Belief and Sharing
Van Bavel, J. J., Harris, E. A., Pärnamets, P., Rathje, S., Doell, K. C., & Tucker, J. A. (2021) · Social Issues and Policy Review · doi:10.1111/sipr.12077 · Cited by 213
The Bias That Divides Us: The Science and Politics of Myside Thinking
Stanovich, K. E. (2021) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/13367.001.0001 · Cited by 152
Intellectual humility in the sociopolitical domain
Krumrei-Mancuso, E. J., & Newman, B. (2020) · Self and Identity · doi:10.1080/15298868.2020.1714711 · Cited by 88
Partisan bias and citizen satisfaction, confidence, and trust in the U.S. Federal Government
Morgeson III, F. V., Sharma, P. N., Sharma, U., & Hult, G. T. M. (2022) · Public Management Review · doi:10.1080/14719037.2021.1945667 · Cited by 25
Metadata
- Authors
- Gerber, A. S., & Huber, G. A.
- Venue
- American Journal of Political Science
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2009-12-28
- Volume
- 54
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 153-173
- ISSN
- 0092-5853
- 1540-5907
- Cited by
- 258
- References
- 2
- Language
- en
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