A Broken Public? Americans’ Responses to the Great Recession
Abstract
Did Americans respond to the recent Great Recession by demanding that government provide policy solutions to rising income insecurity, an expectation of state-of-the-art theorizing on the dynamics of mass opinion? Or did the recession erode support for government activism, in line with alternative scholarship pointing to economic factors having the reverse effect? We find that public support for government social programs declined sharply between 2008 and 2010, yet both fixed-effects and repeated survey analyses suggest economic change had little impact on policy-attitude formation. What accounts for these surprising developments? We consider alternative microfoundations emphasizing the importance of prior beliefs and biases to the formation of policy attitudes. Analyzing the General Social Surveys panel, our results suggest political partisanship has been central. Gallup and Evaluations of Government and Society surveys provide further evidence against the potentially confounding scenario of government overreach, in which federal programs adopted during the recession and the Obama presidency propelled voters away from government. We note implications for theoretical models of opinion formation, as well as directions for partisanship scholarship and interdisciplinary research on the Great Recession.
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?
Support for governmental regulation of the economy declined sharply among rank-and-file Republicans between 1984 and 2010, while it remained unchanged among Democrats.
“support for governmental regulation of the economy declined sharply among rank-and-file Republicans between 1984 and 2010, while it remained unchanged among Democrats175.”
From Cognitive–motivational mechanisms of political polarization in social-communicative contexts (2022) · cites this paper as [175]
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
Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias
Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. H. (1991) · Journal of Economic Perspectives · doi:10.1257/jep.5.1.193 · Cited by 5,019 · 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
Panel Models in Sociological Research: Theory into Practice
Halaby, C. N. (2004) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.30.012703.110629 · Cited by 946 · cited 2× · see citing works
“We use a fixedeffects approach to address omitted variable scenarios, thereby eliminating the impact of any unmeasured factors having time-invariant effects (e.g., Halaby 2004; see also Baltagi 2008; Hsiao 1986).”
BackgroundMethodBeyond the Median: Voter Preferences, District Heterogeneity, and Political Representation
Gerber, E. R., & Lewis, J. B. (2004) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/424737 · Cited by 324 · see citing works
Small Worlds and Cultural Polarization
FLACHE, A., & MACY, M. W. (2011) · The Journal of Mathematical Sociology · doi:10.1080/0022250x.2010.532261 · Cited by 237 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Cognitive–motivational mechanisms of political polarization in social-communicative contexts
Jost, J. T., Baldassarri, D. S., & Druckman, J. N. (2022) · Nature Reviews Psychology · doi:10.1038/s44159-022-00093-5 · Cited by 276 · see citing works
- Authors
- Brooks, C., & Manza, J.
- Affiliations
- Indiana University
- New York University (US)
- ORCID
- Manza, Jeff
- Venue
- American Sociological Review
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2013-09-30
- Volume
- 78
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 727-748
- ISSN
- 0003-1224 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-8271
- OpenAlex
- W1966330484
- Cited by
- 152
- References
- 7
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 34 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 4 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 43.38
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- American Sociological Review (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Social Policy and Reform Studies
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Politics, Economics, and Education Policy
- Keywords
- Great Recession, public opinion, policy attitudes, social programs, government activism, income insecurity, partisanship, opinion formation, economic change, government overreach, Obama administration, public trust in government
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