Economies and Politics: Egocentric or Sociotropic?

Authors

  • Brad Lockerbie

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15763/issn.2374-7781.2006.27.0.191-208

Abstract

Since at least the late 1970s, we have had to grapple with the question of how economics influences politics. Before scholars made use of extensive survey research, most observers, noting the relationship between the state of the economy and election outcomes, argued that individual voters were driven by their own financial concerns. Using survey data, scholars found that individual economic concerns were not strongly related to vote choice. The work of Kinder and Kiewiet (1979, 1981) further upset this consensus by showing that voters were more concerned with the collective than their own concerns. The research presented here, making use of the rather unique 1992 ANES, argues that voters are concerned with both. The apparent non-existent relationship between egocentric economic evaluations and political evaluations is the result of question wording. When appropriately worded egocentric and sociotropic economic survey items are put in equations predicting political phenomena, both are important.

References

Abramson, Paul R., John H. Aldrich, and David W. Rohde. 1999. Change and Continuity in the 1996 and 1998 Elections. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.

Alford, John R., and John R. Hibbing. 1981. Increased Incumbency Advantage in the House. Journal of Politics 43:1042-1061. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2130188

Alford, John R., and Jerome S. Legge, Jr. 1984. Economic Conditions and Individual Vote in the Federal Republic of Germany. Journal of Politics 46:1168-1181. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2131247

Becker, Gary. 1976. The Economic Approach to Human Behavior. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Bloom, Harold, and H. Douglas Price. 1975. Voter Response to Short-Run Economic Conditions: The Asymmetric Effect of Prosperity and Recession. American Political Science Review 69:1240-1254. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1955284

Bullock, Charles S., and Michael J. Scicchitano. 1985. Partisan Defections and Senate Incumbent Elections. In Studies of Congress, ed. Glenn R. Parker. Washington DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.

Collie, Melissa P. 1981. Incumbency, Electoral Safety, and Turnover in the House of Representatives, 1952-1976. American Political Science Review 75:119-131. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1962163

Conover, Pamela Johnston, Stanley Feldman, and Kathleen Knight. 1987. The Personal and Political Underpinnings of Economic Forecasts. American Journal of Political Science 31:559-583. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2111283

Cover, Albert D. 1977. One Good Term Deserves Another: The Advantage of Incumbency in Congressional Elections. American Journal of Political Science 21:523-541. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2110580

Erikson, Robert S. 1972. Malapportionment, Gerrymandering, and Party Fortunes in Congressional Elections. American Political Science Review 66:1234-1245. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1957176

Fiorina, Morris P. 1978. Economic Retrospective Voting in American National Elections: A Microanalysis. American Journal of Political Science 22:426-443. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2110623

Fiorina, Morris P. 1981. Retrospective Voting in American National Elections. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Fiorina, Morris P. 1989. Congress: Keystone of the Washington Establishment. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Funk, Carolyn L., and Patricia A. García-Monet. 1997. The Relationship Between Personal and National Concerns in Public Perceptions about the Economy. Political Research Quarterly 50:317-342. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/448960 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/106591299705000204

Garand, James C., and James E. Campbell. 2000. Before the Vote. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Press.

Hilbe, John. 1997. Logistic Regression: Standardized coefficients and partial correlations. Stata Technical Bulletin 35:162-163.

Johannes, John R., and John C. McAdams. 1981. The Congressional Incumbency Effect: Is it Casework, Policy Compatibility, or Something Else? An Examination of the 1978 Election. American Journal of Political Science 25:512-542. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2110817

Kinder, Donald R., and D. Roderick Kiewiet. 1979. Economic Discontent and Political Behavior: The Role of Personal Grievances and Collective Economic Judgments in Congressional Voting. American Journal of Political Science 79:10-27. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2111027

Kinder, Donald R., and D. Roderick Kiewiet. 1981. Sociotropic Politics: The America Case. British Journal of Political Science 11:129-161. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0007123400002544

King, Gary, Robert Keohane, and Sidney Verba. 1994. Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Knight, Kathleen. 1984. The Dimensionality of Partisan and Ideological Affect: The Influence of Positivity. American Politics Quarterly 12:305-334. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1532673X8401200304

Kramer, Gerald H. 1971. Short-Term Fluctuations in U.S. Voting Behavior in U.S. Voting Behavior, 1896-1964. American Political Science Review 65:131-143. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1955049

Kramer, Gerald H. 1983. The Ecological Fallacy Revisited: Aggregate- versus Individual-Level Findings on Economics and Elections and Sociotropic Voting. American Political Science Review 77:92-111 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1956013

Kuklinski, James H., and Darrell M. West. 1981. Economic Expectations and Voting Behavior in United States Senate and House Elections. American Political Science Review 75:436-447. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1961376

Lane, Robert E. 1986. What Are People Trying To Do With Their Schemata? The Question of Purpose. In Political Cognition, eds. Richard R. Lau and David O. Sears. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Lewis-Beck, Michael S. 1985. Pocketbook Voting in U.S. National Election Studies: Fact or Artifact. American Journal of Political Science 29:348-356. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2111171

Lewis-Beck, Michael S. 1988a. Economics and the American Voter: Past, Present, Future. Political Behavior 10:5-21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00989377

Lewis-Beck, Michael S. 1988b. Economics and Elections: The Major Western Democracies. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Lockerbie, Brad. 1992. Prospective Voting in Presidential Elections: 1956-1988. American Politics Quarterly 20:308-325. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1532673X9202000303

MacKuen, Michael B. 1983. Political Drama, Economic Conditions, and the Dynamics of Presidential Popularity. American Journal of Political Science 27:165-192. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2111014

MacKuen, Michael B., Robert S. Erikson, and James A. Stimson. 1992. Peasants or Bankers? The American Electorate and the U.S. Economy. American Political Science Review 86:597-611. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1964124

Mansbridge, Jane J. 1990. The Rise and Fall of Self-Interest in the Explanation of Political Life. In Beyond Self-Interest, ed. Jane J. Mansbridge. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Markus, Gregory B. 1988. The Impact of Personal and National Economic Conditions on the Presidential Vote: A Pooled Cross-Sectional Analysis. American Journal of Political Science 32:137-154. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2111314

Mayhew, David R. 1974. Congress: The Electoral Connection. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

McAdams, John C., and John R. Johannes. 1983. The 1980 House Elections: Reexamining Some Theories in a Republican Year. Journal of Politics 45:143-162. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2130328

Miller, Arthur H. and Martin P. Wattenberg. 1985. Throwing the Rascals Out: Policy and Performance Evaluations of Presidential Candidates, 1952-1980. American Political Science Review 79:359-372. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1956654

Monroe, Kristen Renwick. 1994. A Fat Lady in a Corset: Altruism and Social Theory. American Journal of Political Science 38:861-893. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2111725

Nagler, Jonathon, and Suzanna DeBoef. 1999. Economic Voting: Enlightened Self-Interest and Economic Reference Groups. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, April, Chicago, IL.

Page, Benjamin I., and Calvin Jones. 1979. Reciprocal Effects of Policy Preferences, Party Loyalties, and the Vote. American Political Science Review 73:1071-1089. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1953990

Rohrschneider, Robert. 1990. The Roots of Public Opinion Toward New Social Movements: An Empirical Test of Competing Explanations. American Journal of Political Science 34:1-30. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2111509

Sears, David O., and Carolyn L. Funk. 1990. Self-Interest in Americans Political Opinions. In Beyond Self-Interest, ed. Jane J. Mansbridge. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Sears, David O., and Richard R. Lau. 1983. Inducing Apparently Self-Interested Political Preferences. American Political Science Review 74:223-253. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2111016

Shah, Dhavan V., Mark D. Watts, David Domke, David P. Fan, and Michael Fibison. 1999. News Coverage, Economic Cues, and the Public's Presidential Preferences, 1984-1996. Journal of Politics 61:914-943. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2647548

Sniderman, Paul M., and Richard A. Brody. 1977. Coping: The Ethic of Self-Reliance. American Journal of Political Science 21:501-521. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2110579

Tullock, Gordon. 1976. The Vote Motive. London: Institute for Economic Affairs.

Tufte, Edward R. 1975. Determinants of the Outcomes of Midterm Congressional Elections. American Political Science Review 69:812-826. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1958391

Tufte, Edward R. 1978. Political Control of the Economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Welch, Susan, and John Hibbing. 1992. Financial Conditions, Gender, and Voting in American National Elections. Journal of Politics 54:197-121. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2131650

Downloads

Published

2006-11-01

Issue

Vol. 27: Fall 2006

Section

Articles

License

Authors who publish with American Review of Politics agree to the following terms:

  1. The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.

  2. Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.

  3. The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:

    1. Attribution: other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;

    2. Non-Commercial: the materials may not be used for commercial purposes;

    3. Share Alike: If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.

with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.

  1. The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

  2. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a pre-publication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access). Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.

  3. Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.

  1. The Author represents and warrants that:

    1. the Work is the Author’s original work;

    2. the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;

    3. the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;

    4. the Work has not previously been published;

    5. the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and

    6. the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.

  2. The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.