The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Issue Ownership in Presidential Elections, with a 1980 Case Study
Abstract
Theory: This paper develops and applies an issue ownership theory of voting that emphasizes the role of campaigns in setting the criteria for voters to choose between candidates. It expects candidates to emphasize issues on which they are advantaged and their opponents are less well regarded. It explains the structural factors and party system variables which lead candidates to differentially emphasize issues. It invokes theories of priming and framing to explain the electorate's response. Hypotheses: Issue emphases are specific to candidates; voters support candidates with a party and performance based reputation for greater competence on handling the issues about which the voter is concerned. Aggregate election outcomes and individual votes follow the problem agenda. Method: Content analysis of news reports, open-ended voter reports of important problems, and the vote are analyzed with graphic displays and logistic regression analysis for presidential elections between 1960 and 1992. Results: Candidates do have distinctive patterns of problem emphases in their campaigns; election outcomes do follow the problem concerns of voters; the individual vote is significantly influenced by these problem concerns above and beyond the effects of the standard predictors.
Overview
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
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1975) · Utility, Probability, and Human Decision Making · doi:10.1007/978-94-010-1834-0_8 · Cited by 22,650
Cited by
Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007) · Annual Review of Political Science · doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.10.072805.103054 · Cited by 3,071
Political Parties, Motivated Reasoning, and Public Opinion Formation
Leeper, T. J., & Slothuus, R. (2014) · Political Psychology · doi:10.1111/pops.12164 · Cited by 722
Evidence of the Long-Term Persistence of Adults' Political Predispositions
Sears, D. O., & Funk, C. L. (1999) · The Journal of Politics · doi:10.2307/2647773 · Cited by 580
Terrorism and Voting: The Effect of Rocket Threat on Voting in Israeli Elections
GETMANSKY, A., & ZEITZOFF, T. (2014) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055414000288 · Cited by 351
The Nature of Affective Polarization: Disentangling Policy Disagreement from Partisan Identity
Dias, N., & Lelkes, Y. (2022) · American Journal of Political Science · doi:10.1111/ajps.12628 · Cited by 338
Metadata
- Authors
- Petrocik, J. R.
- Venue
- American Journal of Political Science
- Publisher
- JSTOR
- Published
- 1996-08
- Volume
- 40
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 825
- ISSN
- 0092-5853 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2319951792
- Cited by
- 2,902
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 42.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Issue Ownership in Presidential Elections, with a 1980 Case Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/2111797
- The paper
- Petrocik, J. R. (1996). Issue Ownership in Presidential Elections, with a 1980 Case Study. American Journal of Political Science. https://doi.org/10.2307/2111797
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.